1 

I LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, t 



W3 ; t 



I UNITED STATES (IF AMERICA. 

0. 



PROTESTANT BIBLE 



ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS 
EXAMINED: 

IN A TREATISE, SHOWING SOME OF THE ERRORS THAT ARE TO HE FOUND IN THE ENGLISH 
TRANSLATIONS OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES, USED BY PROTESTANTS, AGAINST SUCH POINTS 
OF RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE AS ARE THE SUBJECT OF CONTROVERSY BETWEEN THEM AND THE 
MEMBERS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. 

In -which also, % 

FROM THEIR MISTRANSLATING THE TWENTY-THIRD VERSE OF THE FOURTEENTH CHAPTER OF 
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, THE CONSECRATION OF DOCTOR MATTHEW PARKER, THE FIRST 
PROTESTANT ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, IS OCCASIONALLY CONSIDERED. 



BY THOMAS WARD, 

ft 

AUTHOR OF THE CELEBRATED POEM, ENTITLED " ENGLAND'S REFORMATION.'* 



" For I testify to every one that heareth the ivords of the prophecy of this book, If any 
man shall add to these things, God shall add upon him the plagues ivritten in this. book. And 
if any man shall take aioay from the -words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take 
away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things -which 
are written in this book" — Rev. chap. xxii. verses 18, 19. 

A NEW EDITION, CAREFULLY REVISED AND CORRECTED, 



LONDON, PRINTED IN THE YEAR 1688 I 

AND 

PHILADELPHIA 

RE-PRINTED FOR EUGENE CUMMISKEY, NO. 182, NORTH FOURTH STREET. 

1824. 



LIFE OF MR. WARD. 

A- 

^ The life of Mr. Ward is greatly involved in obscurity, and though the editor had many 
^* difficulties to encounter in ascertaining its events ; yet he is happy in beng enabled to 
«C" gratify curiosity, by laying before the public some of the most interesting particulars 
concerning this extraordinary man — they have been chiefly communicated by a gentle- 
man in London. 

Thomas Ward was the son of a respectable farmer, and was born at Danby Castle, in 
the Moors of Yorkshire, on the 13th of April, 1652. The early part of his life passed 
away undistinguished from that of ordinary children, and nothing remarkable of him is 
known until his fourteenth year, when we find him at Pickering School, giving the first 
indications of his genius, and excelling his brothers, of whom he was the eldest, in his 
taste and knowledge of the classics. Here he was initiated in the first principles of 
arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy, in which sciences he became a great proficient. 
So much was his father pleased with his early propensity to learning, and the abilities 
which he discovered, that he determined to rescue him from the obscurity of a country 
life, and destined him for one of the learned professions. Young Ward was accordingly 
offered his choice to become a clergyman, a physician, or a lawyer; but, with a mind 
already matured by study and thinking, he hesitated — and at length declined his father's 
offers. In the practice of the law, he observed there were too many temptations to dis- 
honesty, and he doubted his firmness to resist them. The profession of physic was re- 
pugnant to the delicacy of his feelings ; and, as a clergyman, he feared that he might 
contribute more to the destruction than the salvation of his fellow-man. Thus, perhaps, 
a too fastidious nicety in his conscience and ideas, left him without a calling, and he 
entered on the world with very little prospects of a permanent subsistence; 

About this period his talents and acquirements first began to introduce him into no- 
tice, and he accepted an invitation from a gentleman of fortune to live with him as a com- 
panion, and tutor to his children. In this retreat he had an opportunity of following the 
particular bias of his mind, and accordingly he bent himself with incredible application 
to the study of controversy, then the rage of the day. Church history, the ancient fa- 
thers, the Scriptures, and the more modern catholic controversies, always occupied his 
literary hours ; but he still found occasional recreation and delight in poetry and the 
classics. He read incessantly, but not with the frivolity of one who skims the surface, 
and seeks only to arm himself with sublety and sophism for impertinent disputation ; he 
read to enrich his mind, to correct his understanding, and improve his heart. To this 
serious disposition and habit of reflection, must be attributed the change in his religious 
sentiments which immediately took place. His father and all his family were protestants, 
and he himself was educated in hostility to catholic opinions. His liberal and penetrating 
mind, however, disdained to wear the trammels of prejudice, and he even shook off the 
authority of a parent, rather than remain a slave, contrary to conscience and conviction, 
to the false principles he had at first imbibed. He accordingly embraced the catholic 
faith, which, together with his marrying a young lady of the same persuasion, so highly 
incensed his father, that at his death, which happened soon after, he bequeathed all he 
possessed to his protestant wife and children. This disappointment and blasting of his 
hopes, with his consequent destitute situation, it might be expected would have produced 
envy and irritation on his part; but his was no ordinary mind, and, raising himself above 
every little paltry consideration of self, in the enthusiasm of charity, he directed his 
whole endeavours to the conversion of his mother and family. Providence blessed his 
exertions, and lie had the happiness of seeing himself united to them in faith, as well as 
in affection. To a youth of uncertainty, disquietude, and separation from his family, 
succeeded the calm of domestic peace, and the security of competence. For some years 
he remained buried and contented in this domestic retirement, but his genius opening 
with age, and expanding with increase of knowledge, began to be restless, and thirsted 
for universal information. Sated with books, he wished to know mankind; and, with 
this intention, having, after much intreaty, obtained his mother's and wife's consent, he 
left his own country, and passed over to France. In France he continued for some time, 
learning the manners and language of the people, and from thence went into Italy, and 
settled himself at Home. In this famous city, the wreck and monument of ancient 
greatness, he had a wide range to gratify his taste, to contemplate the fallen and mutila- 
ted glories of the ancient arts : he was continually in the churches, the public buildings, 
and public libraries, and spent a great portion of his time particularly in the Vatican. 



iv 



LIFE OF MR. WARD, 



Here he had an opportunity of seeing some of the best documents respecting the His- 
tory of England, from which he did not neglect to make numerous and useful quota- 
tions. — Controversy again became his favourite study, which was soon interrupted be 
accepting a commission in the pope's guards, in which he remained for five or six years, 
during which time he served in the maritime war against the Turks. His military career 
ended with the war, and he returned to England, at the pressing solicitations of his wife 
and relations, in the 34th year of his age. On his arrival, he was patronized and received 
on terms of friendship by lords Derwentwater and Lumney, col. Thomas Radcliff, Mr. 
Thornton, and others, to whom he was recommended by his learning, his wit, and a 
suavity of manners peculiarly his own. About this period he set about writing his Er- 
rata to the Protestant Bible, which was published in the year 1688. His Monomachia, or 
Duel with Dr. Tillotson, appeared next, but anonymously ; which made Dr. Tillotson 
observe, that it must have been written by some able jesuit, not imagining that so much 
force of argument and theological research, could be possessed by a layman. His Tree 
of Life, an ingenious device, presenting at one view an epitome of church history, ac- 
cording to the most exact chronology ; his Controversy of Ordinations truly stated ; his 
Conference -with Mr. Richlew, Minister of Hexham ; his Notes on the 39 Articles and the 
Book of Homilies, all followed one another in rapid succession, and soon after appeared 
his well known work, the Reformation, a burlesque poem, in which he imitates Butler 
with considerable success. The notes to this poem, collected from the most approved 
historians, as Stow, Camden, Speed, Baker, Burnet, Heylin, Clarendon, &c. form a com- 
plete History of Ecclesiastical Affairs in England, from Henry the Eighth's time to the 
end of Oates's plot. This was the last publication that came from the pen of Mr. Ward, 
though he afterwards compiled and wrote the History of England. It is much to be 
regretted, that a coincidence of untoward circumstances, and, particularly, his being 
obliged to fly the country and go over to France, prevented this work from being ever 
given to the world : the documents for it were collected by him with great diligence, 
and he himself esteemed it his best production. The manuscript is now in possession 
of the editor, and may, perhaps, in due time, be offered to the public. 

He died in the 56th year of his age, anno 1708, and was buried at St. Germain's, in 
France, where his obsequies were performed with a solemnity becoming so pious and 
learned a man. The enemies of Mr. Ward, who, on account of his religious opinions, 
and his boldness in defending them, were many, seem to have conspired against his 
character, and have maliciously confounded him with another of the same name, a man 
of dissolute morals, and no education, but of a prolific turn in producing works of low 
ribaldry and shameful obscenity. The productions of this man, whose name was Ed- 
ward, and who all his life kept a public-house in Moorfields, have been attributed to 
our author by Jacob, Oldyss, and even the writers of the Biographical Dictionary, pub- 
lished in London, in 1798. The London Spy, a book entitled Apollo's Maggot, a drama- 
tic piece called the Humours of a Coffee-House, Don Quixote, turned into Hudibrastic 
verse, are among the number of those publications, which have been always, though 
wrongfully, imputed to the wrfter of the Reformation. There is, moreover, a great dif- 
ference as to the time of their death, for Edward Ward lived to the year 1731, and we 
find a poetical will of his printed in Appleby's Journal in the September of that year.* 

Mr. Ward was a man of a comprehensive and versatile genius, that embraced and cul- 
tivated studies of an almost opposite nature. He possessed a deep fund of ancient and 
modern learning. He knew the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin languages, and was well 
skilled in French and Italian, lie was one of the best controvertists of his time., as Til- 
lotson and Burnet both acknowledged. He loved poetry, particularly of the burlesque 
kind, to which a lively eccentric fancy strongly inclined him. He often indulged in it 
for amusement ; and perhaps he chose that ludicrous channel for conveying the history 
of the Reformation to the public, because he saw it most adapted to the taste of the 
times, and most agreeable to common conception. His Errata to the Protestant Bible, 
though little known, for want of publication in a country to which it was obnoxious, is a 
work of such learned merit, such nice arrangement, and such clear disquisition in all the 
controverted points of religion and Scripture, that it will convey Mr. Ward's name to the 
latest posterity as a man of genius, judgment and erudition. His disposition was generous 
and mild, though not incapable of being provoked to resentment : he even fought two 
duels in his youth, from which his religion would certainly have restrained him, if he 
had courage enough to be a coward. When in the army, he was the model of a Chris- 
tian soldier; he joined p'iety to bravery; he fought and prayed; and his intervals of 
leisure from duty, were filled up by reading. He was, in fine, a theologian, a poet, and 
a soldier ; and passed his life with fame and honour to himself. 

* See the Perth edition of the Encyclopaedia, article Ward, where they are properly 
discriminated. 



PREFACE. 



Amostg the many and irreconcilable differences between Roman catholics and the 
sectaries of our days, those about the Holy Scriptures claim not the least place on the 
stage of controversy : As, first, whether the Bible is the sole and only rule of faith ? 
Secondly, whether all things necessary to salvation are contained in the Bible ? Or, 
whether we are bound to believe some things, as absolutely necessary to salvation,, 
which are either not clear in Scripture, or not evidently deduced out of Scripture ? — ■ 
Thirdly, whether every individual person, of sound judgment, ought to follow his own 
private interpretation of the Scripture ? If so, why one party or profession should con- 
demn, persecute, and penal-law another, for being of that persuasion he finds most 
agreeable to the Scripture, as expounded according to his own private spirit ? If not, 
to what interpreter ought they to submit themselves, and on whom may they safely and 
securely depend, touching the exposition and true sense and meaning of the same ? — 
Fourthly, whence have we the Scripture ? That is, who handed it down to us from the 
apostles who wrote it ? And by what authority we receive it for the word of God ? 
And, whether we ought not to receive the sense and true meaning of the Scripture, 
upon the same authority we receive the letter ? For if protestants think, the letter was 
safe in the custody of the Roman catholic church, from which they received it, how can 
they suspect the purity of that sense, which was kept and delivered to them by the 
same church and authority ? With several other such like queries, frequently proposed 
by catholics; and never yet, nor ever likely to be, solidly answered by any sectaries 
whatever. 

It is not the design of this following treatise to enter into these disputes; but only to 
show thee, Christian reader, that those translations of the Bible, which the English pro- 
testant clergy have made and presented to the people for their only rule of faith, are in 
many places not only partial, but false, and disfigured with several corruptions, abuses, 
and falsifications, in derogation to the most material points of catholic doctrine, and in 
favour and advantage of their own erroneous opinions : for, 

As it has been the custom of heretics in all ages to pretend to Scripture alone for their 
rule, and to reject the authority of God's holy church ; so has it also ever been their 
practise to falsify, corrupt, and abuse the same in divers manners. 

1. One way is, to deny whole books thereof, or parts of books, when they are evi- 
dently against them : So did, for example, Ebion all St. Paul's Epistles; Manicheus the 
Acts of the Apostles ; Luther likewise denied three of the four Gospels, saying, that St. 
John's is the only true Gospel ; and so do our English protestants those books which 
they call Apocrypha. 

_ 2. Another way is, to call in question at the least, and make some doubt of the autho- 
rity of certain books of holy Scriptures, thereby to diminish their credit : So did 
Manicheus affirm, that the whole New Testament was not written by the apostles, and 
particularly St. Matthew's Gospel : So does Luther discredit the epistle of St. James : so 
did Marcion and the Arians deny the epistle to the Hebrews to be St. Paul's; in which 
they were followed by our first English protestant translators of the Bible, who pre- 
sumed to strike St. Paul's name out of the very title of the said epistle.* 

3. Another way is, to expound the Scripture according to their own private spirit, 
and to reject the approved sense of the ancient holy fathers, and catholic church : So do 
all heretics, who seem to ground their errors upon the Scriptures ; especially those, who 
will have Scripture, as by themselves expounded, for their only rule of faith. 

4. Another way is, to alter the very original text of the holy Scriptures, by adding, 
diminishing, and changing it here or there for their purpose: So did the Arians, Nes- 
torians, Stc. and also Marcion ; who is therefore called Mus Ponticus, from his gnawing, 
as it were, certain places with his corruptions ; and for the same reason, may Beza not 
improperly he called the Mouse of Geneva. 

5. Another way, not unlike this, is, to make corrupt and false translations of the 
Scriptures for the maintenance of their errors : So did the Arians and Pelagians of old, 
and so have the pretended reformers of our days done, which I intend to make the sub- 
ject of this following treatise. 

* See Bibles, 1579, 1580. 

\ 



\ i 



PREFACE, 



Yet, before I proceed any further, let me assure my reader, that this work is not un- 
dertaken with any design of lessening' the credit or authority of the holy Bible, as per- 
haps some may be ready to surmise : For indeed, it is a common exclamation among our 
adversaries, especially such of them as one would think should have a greater respect 
for truth, that catholics make light of the written word of God : that they undervalue 
and contemn the sacred Scriptures : that they endeavour to lessen the credit and autho- 
rity of the holy Bible. Thus possessing the poor deluded people with an ill opinion of 
catholics, as if they rejected, and trod under feet, the written word : whereas it is evi- 
dent to all, who know them, that none can have a greater respect and veneration for 
the holy Scripture, than catholics have, receiving, reverencing, and honouring the same, 
as the very pure and true word of God ; neither rejecting, nor so much as doubting of 
the least tittle in the Bible, from the beginning of Genesis, to the end of the Revelations; 
several devout catholics having that profound veneration for it, that they always read it 
kneeling on their knees with the greatest humility and reverence imaginable, not en- 
during to see it profaned in any kind ; nor so much as to see the least torn leaf of a Bible 
put to any manner of unseemly use. Those who, besides all this, consider with what very 
indifferent behaviour the Scripture is ordinarily handled among protestants, will not, I 
am confident, say, that catholics have a less regard for it, than protestants ; but, on the 
contrary, a far greater. 

Again, dear reader, if thou findest in any part of this treatise, that the nature of the 
subject has extorted from me such expressions, as may perhaps seem either spoken with 
too much heat, or not altogether so soft as might be wished for ; yet, let me desire thee, 
not to look upon them as the dictates of passion, but rather as the just resentments of 
a zealous mind, moved with the incentive of seeing God s sacred word adulterated and 
corrupted by ill-designing men, on purpose to delude and deceive the ignorant and un* 
wary reader. 

The holy Scriptures were written by the prophets, apostles, and evangelists; the Old 
Testament in Hebrew, except only some few parts in Chaldee and Syriac; the greatest 
part of the New Testament was writtten in Greek, St. Matthew's Gospel in Hebrew, 
and St. Mark's in Latin. We have not at this day the original writings of these pro- 
phets and apostles, nor of the seventy interpreters who translated the Old Testament 
into Greek, about 300 years before the coming of Christ ; we have only copies ; for the 
truth and exactness whereof, we must rely upon the testimony and tradition of the 
church, which in so important a point God would never permit to err : So that we have 
not the least doubt, but the copy, authorized and approved of by the church, is suffi- 
ciently authentic. For what avails it for a Christian to believe, that Scripture is the 
word of God, if he be uncertain which copy and translation is true? Yet, notwithstand- 
ing the necessity of admitting some true authentic copy, protestants pretend, that 
there is none authentic in the world, as may be seen in the preface to the Tigurine 
edition of the Bible, and in all their books of controversy ; seeing therein they condemn 
the council of Trent, for declaring that the old translation is authentic, and yet them- 
selves name no other for such. And, therefore, though the Lutherans fancy Luther's 
translation ; the Calvinists that of Geneva ; the Zuinglians that of Zuinglius; the English, 
sometimes one, and sometimes another: Yet, because they do not hold any one to be 
authentic, it follows, from their exceptions against the infallibility of the Roman catholic 
church in declaring or decreeing a true and authentic copy of Scripture, and their con- 
fession of the uncertainty of their own translations, that they have no certainty of Scrip- 
ture at all, nor even of faith, which they ground upon Scripture alone. 

That the Vulgate of the Latin is the most true and authentic copy, has been the judg- 
ment of God's church for above those 1300 years ; during- which time, the church has 
always used it; and therefore it is, by the sacred council* of Trent, declared authentic 
and canonical in every part and book thereof. 

Most of the Old Testament, as it is in the said Latin Vulgate, was translatcdf out of 
Hebrew by St. Hierom ; and the New Testament had been before ills thne translated 
out of Greek, but was by him} reviewed ; and such faults as had crept in by the negli- 
gence of the transcribers, were corrected by him by the appointment of Pope Damas- 
us. " You constrain me/' says he, " to make a new work of an old, that I, after so many 
copies of the Scriptures dispersed through the world, should sit as a certain judge, 
which of them agree with the true Greek. I have restored the New Testament to the. 
/truth of the Greek, and have translated the old according to the Hebrew. Truly, 1 will 
affirm it confidently, and will produce many witnesses of this work, that I have changed 
nothing from the truth of the Hebrew," &c.§ 

* Con. Trident. Sess. 4. -f- S. Hierom. in lib. de viris Illustr. extremo, 8c in Prasfat. 
librorum quos Latinos fecit. + Hier. Ep. 89. ad Aug. qu?est. 11. inter Ep. Aug. § Seehis 
preface before the New Testament, dedicated to pope Dama-sus, and his Catalogue in fine- 



PREFACE. 



vii 



And for sufficient testimony of the sincerity of the translator, and commendations of 
his translation, read these words of the great doctor St. Augustine : " There was not 
wanting," says he " in these our days, Hierom the priest, a man most learned and skilful 
in all the three tongues ; who not from the Greek, but from the Hebrew, translated the 
same Scriptures into Latin, whose learned labour the Jews yet confess to be true."f 

Yea, the truth and purity of this translation is such, that even the bitterest of protest- 
ants themselves are forced to confess it to be the best, and to prefer it before all others, 
as also to acknowledge the learning* piety, and sincerity of the translator of it ; which 
Mr. Whitaker, notwithstanding his railing in another place, does in these words : " St. 
Hierom, I reverence ; Damasus, I commend ; and the work I confess to be godly ^nd 
profitable to the church.'^ 

Dr. Dove says thus of it : " We grant it fit, that for uniformity in quotations of places, 
in schools and pulpits, one Latin text should be used : and we can be contented, for 
the antiquity thereof, to prefer that (the Vulgate) before all other Latin books."§ 

And for the antiquity of it, Dr. Covel tells us, " that it was used in the church 1300 
years ago :" not doubting but to prefer that translation before others.|| 

Dr. Humphrey frees St. Hierom, both from malice and ignorance in translating, m 
these words : " The old interpreter was much addicted to the propriety of the words, 
and indeed with too much anxiety, which I attribute to religion, not to ignorance. "f 

In regard of which integrity and learning, Molinoeus signifies his good esteem thereof, 
saying,** " I cannot easily forsake the vulgar and accustomed reading, which also I am 
accustomed earnestly to defend :" yea,ff " I prefer the vulgar edition, before Erasmus's, 
Bucer's, Bullinger's/Brentius's, the Tigurine translation ; yea, before John Calvin's, and 
all others." How honourably he speaks of it ! And yet, 

Conradus Pellican, a man commended by Bucer, Zuinglius, Melancthon, and all the fa- 
mous protestants about Basil, Tigure, Berne, &c. gives it a far higher commendation, in 
these words :±* " I find the vulgar edition of the Psalter to agree for the sense, with 
such dexterity, learning, and fidelity of the Hebrew, that I doubt not, but the Greek and 
Latin interpreter was a man most learned, most godly, and of a prophetical spirit." 
Which certainly are the best properties of a good translator. 

In fine, even Beza himself, one of the greatest of our adversaries, affords this honour* 
able testimony of our vulgar translation : " I confess," says he, " that the old interpreter 
seems to have interpreted the holy books with wonderful sincerity and religion. The 
vulgar edition I do, for the most part, embrace and prefer before all others."§§ 

You see, how highly our Vulgate in Latin is commended by these learned protestants : 
see likewise, how it has been esteemed by the ancient|||| fathers : yet notwithstanding all 
this is not sufficient to move protestants to accept or acquiesce in it ; and doubtless the 
very reason is, because they would have as much liberty to reject the true letter, as the 
true sense of Scriptures, their new doctrines being condemned by both. For had they 
allowed anyone translation to have been authentic, they certainly could never have had 
the impudence so wickedly to have corrupted it, by adding, omitting, and changing, 
which they could never have pretended the least excuse for, in any copy by themselves 
held for true and authentic. 

Obj. But however, their greatest objection against the Vulgate Latin is, that we ought 
rather to have recourse to the original languages, the fountains of the Hebrew and 
Greek, in which the Scriptures were written by the prophets and apostles, who could 
not err; than to stand to the Latin translations, made by divers interpreters, who might 
err. . 

Anstv. When it is certain, that the originals or fountains are pure, and not troubled or 
corrupt, they are to be preferred before translations : but it is most certain, that they 
are corrupted in divers places, as protestants themselves are forced to acknowledge, 
and as it appears by their own translations. For example, Psal. 22. ver. 16. they trans- 
late, " they pierced my hands and my feet :" whereas, according to the Hebrew that 
now is, it must be read, "As a lion, my hands, and my feet;" which no doubt, is not 
only nonsense, but an intolerable corruption of the later Jews against the passion of our 
Saviour, of which the old authentic Hebrew was a most remarkable prophecy. Again, 
according to the Hebrew, it is read, Achaz, king of Israel; which being false, they in 

f St. Aug. de Civit. Dei, lib. 18. c. 43. & Ep. 80. ad Hierom c. 3. & lib. 2. Doct 
Christi, c. 15. \ Whitaker in his answer to Reynolds, page 241. § Dove, Persuasion 
to Recusants, p. 16. || See Dr. Covel's Answer to Burges, page 91, 94. f Dr. Hum. 
de Ratione Interp. lib. 1. page 74. ** Molin in Nov. Test. Part. 30. ff Et in Luc. 17, 
i$ Pellican in Praefat. in Psalter, ann. 1584. §§ Beza in Annot. in Luc. 1. 1. Et in Prx- 
fat.Nov. Teat. |||| S. Hierom. & St. Aug. supr. St. Greg. lib. 70. Mor. c. 23. Isidor. lib. 
6. Etym. c. 5. 7. & de Divin Offic. lib. 1. cap. 12. S. Beda in Marty rol. Cassiod. 21. Inst. he. 

2 Chron. 28. ver. 19. 



Viii 



?REFAC,E, 



some of their first translations read, Achaz, king of Juda, according to the truth, and as 
it is in the Greek and Vulgate Latin. Yet their Bible of 1579, as also their last transla- 
tion, had rather follow the falsehood of the Hebrew .against their own knowledge, than 
to be thought beholden to the Greek and Latin in so light a matter. Likewise, where 
the Hebrew says, Zedecias, Joachin's brother, they are forced to translate Zedecias his 
father's brother, as indeed the truth is according to the Greek.* So likewise in another 
place, where the Hebrew is, " He begat Azuba his wife and Jerioth ;" which they not 
easily knowing what to make of, translate in some of their Bibles, " He begat Azuba of 
his wife Jerioth ;" and in others, " He begat Jerioth of his wife Azuba." But without 
multiplying examples, it is sufficiently known to protestants, and by them acknowledged, 
how intolerably the Hebrew fountains and originals are by the Jews corrupted : amongst 
others, Dr. Humphrey says, " The Jewish superstition, how many places it has corrupt- 
ed, the reader may easily find out and judge."f And in another place ; " I look not," 
says he, " that men should too much follow the rabbins, as many do ; for those places, 
which promise and declare Christ the true Messias, are most filthily depraved by them.*" 

" The old interpreter," says another protestant, " seems to have read one way, whereas 
the Jews now read another ; which I say, because I would not have men think this to 
have proceeded from the ignorance or slothfulness of the old interpreter : rather we 
have cause to find fault for want of diligence in the antiquaries, and faith in the Jews ; 
who, both before Christ's coming and since, seem to be less careful of the Psalms, than 
of their Tahnudical Songs."§ 

I would gladly know of our protestant translators of the Bible, what reason they have 
to think the Hebrew fountain they boast of so pure and uncorrupt, seeing not only let- 
ters and syllables have been mistaken, texts depraved, but even whole books of the 
prophets utterly lost and perished ? How many books of the ancient prophets, sometime 
extant, are not now to be found ? We read in the Old Testament, of a Liber Bellorum 
Domini, " The Book of the Wars of our Lord ; the Book of the Just men, protestants 
call it the Book of Jasher. The Book of Jehu the Son of Hanani ; the Books of Semeias 
the Prophet, and of Addo the Seer : and Samuel wrote in a book the law of the king- 
dom, how kings ought to rule, and laid it up before our Lord : and the works of Solomon 
were written in the book of Nathan the Prophet, and in the books of Ahias the Shilon- 
ite, and in the vision of Addo the Seer."|| With several others, whiph are all quite 
perished ; yea, and perished in such a time, when the Jews were " the peculiar people 
of God," and when, of all nations, " they were to God a holy nation, a kingly priest- 
hood :" and, now, when they are no national people, have no government, no king, no 
priest, but are vagabonds upon the earth, and scattered among all people ; may we rea- 
sonably think their divine and ecclesiastical books to have been so warily and carefully 
kept, that all and every part is safe, pure, and incorrupt ? that every parcel is sound, no 
points, tittles, or letters lost, or misplaced, but all sincere, perfect, and absolute ? 

How easy is it, in Hebrew letters, to mistake sometimes one for another, and so to al- 
ter the whole sense ? As for example, this very letter van for jod,^ has certainly made 
disagreement in some places ; as where the Septuagint read, to Kpar^r p& rrpk ere <pvyoc^ t 
Fortituclinem meam ad te custodiam, " My strength I will keep to thee ;" which reading 
St. Hierom also followed : it is now in the Hebrew ijj; fortitudinem ejus, " His strength I 
will keep to thee."** Which corruptions our last protestant translators follow, reading, 
" Because of his strength will I wait upon thee ;" and to make sense of it, they add the 
words " because of," and change the words " keep to" into " wait upon," to the great 
perverting of the sense and sentence. A like error is that in Gen. 3. (if it be an error, 
as many think it is none) Ipsa conteret caput tuum > for Ipse or Jpswn, about which pro- 
testants keep such a clamour 

As the Hebrew has been by the Jews abused and falsified against our blessed Saviour 
Christ Jesus, especially in such places as were manifest prophecies of his death and 
passion : so likewise has the Greek fountain been corrupted by the eastern heretics, 
against divers points of Christian doctrine ; insomuch that protestant themselves, who 
pretend so great veneration for it, dare not follow it in many places ; but are forced to 
fly to our Vulgate Latin, as is observed in the preface to the Rhemish Testament ; where 
also you may find sufficient reasons, why our catholic Bible is translated into English 
rather from the Vulgate Latin, than from the Greek. 

To pass by several examples of corruptions in the Greek copy, which might be pro- 
duced, I will only, amongst many, take notice of these two following rash and incon- 
siderate additions : first, Joh. 8. ver. 59. after these words, exivit e templo, " Went out 

• 4 Kings, 24. ver. 17, 19. | Humph. 1. 1. de Rat. interp. pag. 178. * Lib 2. p. 219. 
§ Conrad. Pell. Tom. 4. in Psal. 85. v. 9. || Numb. 21. v. 14. Josh. 10. v. 13. 2 Kings, 
3. v. 18. 2 Paral. 20. ver. 34. 12. ver. 15. 1 King. 10. v. 25. 2 Paral. 9. ver. 29. . H m 
w<n nct ** FsaL 58. v. 10. in Prot. Bible, it is Psah 59. ver. 9. ff Gen. 3. v, 15. 



PREFACE. 



is 



of the temple are added, transiens per medium eorum, sic prceteriit ; " Going through 
the midst of them, and so passed by."* Touching which addition, Beza writes thus : 
" These words are found in very ancient copies ; but I think, as does Erasmus, that the 
first part, * going through the midst of them,' is taken out of Luke 4. ver. 30. and crept 
into the text by fault of the writers, who found that written in the margin : and that the 
latter part, ' and so passed by/ was added to make this chapter join well with the next, 
And I am moved thus to think, not only because neither Chrysostom, nor Augustine, (he 
might have said, nor Hierom) make any mention of this piece, but also, because it seems 
not to hang together very probably ; for, if he withdrew himself out of their sight, how 
went he through the midst of thera ?" 8tc.f Thus Beza disputes against it ; for which 
cause, I suppose, it is omitted by our first English translators, who love to follow what 
their master Beza delivers to them in Latin, though forsooth they would have us think, 
they followed the Greek most precisely ; for in their translations of the year 1561, 1562, 
1577, 1579, they leave it out, as Beza does : Yet in their Testament of 1580, as also in. 
this last translation, (Bible 1683,) they put it in with as much confidence, as if it had 
neither been disputed against by Beza, nor omitted by their former brethren. 

To this we may also join that piece which protestants so gloriously sing or say at the 
end of the Lord's Prayer, *' For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, for ever 
and ever, Amen?' which not only Erasmus dislikes,* but Bullinger himself holds it for a 
mere patch sowed to the rest, " by he knows not whom ;"§ and allows well of Eras= 
mus's judgment, reproving Laurentius Valla for finding fault with the Latin edition, be- 
cause it wants it : — " There is no reason," says he, " why Laurentius Valla should take 
the matter so hotly, as though a great part of the Lord's Player were cut away : rather 
their rashness was to be reproved, who durst presume to piece on their toys unto the 
Lord's Prayer." 

Let not my reader think, that our Latin Vulgate differs from the true and most authen- 
tic Greek copies, which were extant in St. Hierom's days, but only from such as are 
now extant, and since his days corrupted. " How unworthily," says Beza, " and without 
cause, does Erasmus blame the old interpreter, as dissenting from the Greek ! He dis- 
sented, I grant, from those Greek copies which Erasmus had gotten ; but we have found 
hot in one place, that the same interpretation which he blames, is grounded on the 
authority of other Greek copies, and those most ancient : yea, in some number of places 
we have observed, that the reading of the Latin text of the old interpreter, though it 
agree not sometimes with our Greek copies, yet it is much more convenient, for that 
it seems to follow some truer and better copy."|| 

Now, if our Latin Vulgate be framed exactly, though not to the Vulgar Greek exam- 
ples now extant, yet to more ancient and perfect copies ; if the Greek copies have many 
faults, errors, corruptions, and additions in them, as not only Beza avouches, but as our 
protestant translators confess, and as evidently appears by their leaving the Greek, and 
following the Latin, with what reason can they thus cry up the fountains and originals, 
as incorrupt and pure ? With what honesty can they call us from our ancient Vulgar 
Latin, to the present Greek, from which themselves so licentiously depart at pleasure, 
to follow our Latin ?f 

Have we not great reason to think, that as the Latin church has been ever more con= 
stant in keeping the true faith, than the Greek, so it has always been more careful in 
preserving the Scriptures from corruption? 

Let protestants only consider, whether it be more credible, that St. Hierom, one of 
the greatest doctors of God's church, and the most skilful in the languages wherein the 
Scripture was written, who lived in the primitive times, when perhaps some of the origi- 
nal writings of the apostles were extant, or at least the true and authentic copies in 
Hebrew and Greek better known than they are now : let us then consider, I say, whether 
is more credible, that a translation made and received by this holy doctor, and then ap- 
proved of by all the world, and ever since accepted and applauded in God's church, 
should be defective, false, or deceitful ? or that a translation made since the pretended 
reformation, not only by men of scandalous, and notoriously wicked lives, but from copies 
corrupted by Jews, Arians, and other Greek heretics, should be so ?** 

* A/c-xS&ly <f<a /tt£<r« durav xa* 7r<xpnyzv Sto)?. 

f Keza in Joh. cap. 8. v. 59. 

t Erasm. in Annot. 

§ Bullinger, Decad. 5. Serm. 5. 

II Beza in Prsef. Nov. Test. Anno 1556. 

If See the Pref. to the Rhemish Testament. Dr. Martin's Discovery. Reynold's Re- 
futation of Whitaker, cap. 13. 

** Such were Luther, Calvin, Beza, Bucer, Cranmer, Tindal, &c. 

b 



X 



PREFACE; 



In vain therefore do protestants tell us, that their translations are taken immediately 
from the fountains of the Greek and Hebrew ; so is also our Latin Vulgate ; only with 
this difference, that ours was taken from the fountains when they were clear, and by 
holy and learned men, who knew which were the crystal waters, and true copies ; but 
theirs is taken from fountains troubled by broachers of heresies, self-interested and time- 
serving persons ; and after that the Arians, and other heretics had, I say, corrupted and 
poisoned them with their false and abominable doctrines. 

Obj. 2. Cheminitius and others yet further object, that there are some corruptions 
found in the Vulgate Latin, viz. that these words, ipsa conteret caput tuum t * are cor- 
rupted, thereby to prove the intercession of the blessed Virgin Mary ; and that instead 
thereof, we should read, ipsum conteret caput tuum, seeing it was spoken of the seed, 
which was Christ, as all ancient writers teach. 

Ansio. Some books of the vulgate edition, have ipsa, and. some others ipse ; and though 
many Hebrew copies have ipse, yet there want not some which have ipsa : and the points 
being taken away, the Hebrew word may be translated ipsa : yea, the holy fathers,f St, 
Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostom, St. Gregory, St. Bede, &c. read it ipsa, and, I 
think, we have as great reason to follow their interpretation of it, as Cheminitius's, or 
that of the protestants of our days : and though the word conteret in the Hebrew be of 
the masculine gender, and so should relate to semen, which also in the Hebrew is of the 
masculine gender ; yet it is not rare in the Scriptures to have pronouns and verbs of 
the masculine gender joined with nouns of the feminine, as in Ruth 1. 8. Esther 1. 20. 
Eccles. 12. 5. The rest of Cheminitius's cavils you will find sufficiently answered by 
the learned cardinal Bellarfnine, lib. 2. de verb. Dei, cap. 12. 13. 14. 

Again, Mr. Whitaker condemns us for following our Latin Vulgate so precisely, as 
thereby to omit these words,* " when this corruptible, shall have put on incorruption," 
which are in the Greek exemplars, but not in our Vulgate Latin : whence it follows, 
assuredly, says he " that Hierom dealt not faithfully here, or that his version was cor- 
rupted afterwards." 

I answer to this, with doctor Reynolds,§ that this omission (if it be any,) could not 
proceed from malice or design, seeing there is no loss or hindrance to any part of doc- 
trine, by reading as we read ; for the self-same thing is most clearly set down in the 
very next lines before ; thus stand the words : " For this corruptible, must do on incor- 
ruption; and this mortal, do on immortality : and when this (corruptible, has done on 
incorruption, and this) mortal has done on immortality." Where you see the words, 
which I have put down, inclosed with parenthesis, are contained most expressly in the 
foregoing sentence, which is in all our Testaments ; so that there is no harm or danger 
either to faith, doctrine, or manners, if it be omitted. 

That it was of old in some Greek copies, as it stands in our Vulgate Latin, is evident 
by St. Hierom's translating it thus : and why ought St. Hierom to be suspected of un- 
faithful dealing, seeing he put the self-same words and sense in the next lines immedi- 
ately preceding ? and that it was not corrupted since, appears by the common reading 
of most men, in all after-ages. St. Ambrose, in his commentary upon the same place, 
reads as we do. So does St. Augustine, De Civitate Dei, cited by St. Bede, in his com- 
mentary upon the same chapter.|| So read also the rest of the catholic interpreters, 
Haymo, Anselm, &c. 

But if this place be rightly considered, so far it is from appearing as done with any 
design of corrupting the text, that on the contrary, it apparently shows the sincerity of 
our Latin translation : for, as we keep our text, according as St. Hierom and the church 
then delivered it ; so notwithstanding, because the said words are in the ancient Greek 
copies, we generally add them in the margin of every Latin Testament which the church 
uses, as may be seen in divers prints of Paris, Lovain, and other universities : and if 
there be any fault in our English translation, it is only that this particle was not put 
down in the margin, as it was in the Latin which we followed. So that this, I say, proves 
no corruption, but rather great fidelity in our Latin Testament, that it agrees with St. 
Hierom, and consequently with the Greek copies, which he interpreted, as with St. 
Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Bede, Haymo, and St. Anselm. 

Whether these vain and frivolous objections are sufficient grounds for their rejecting 
our Vulgate Latin, and flying to the original (but now impure) fountains, I refer to the 
judicious reader. 

* Gen. 3. f St. August, lib. 2. de Gen. cont. Manich. c. 18. 1. 11. de Gen. ad Literam, 
cap. 36. St. Ambr. lib. de Fuga Saeculi, cap. 7. St. Chrysost. in Horn. 17. in Gen. St. 
Greg. lib. 1. Mor. cap. 38. Beda, & alii in hunc locum, t 1 Cor. c. 15. ver. 54. 

§ See Dr. Reynold's Refutation of Whitaker's Reprehensions, chap. 10. 

11 St. Beda, in 1 Cor. c. 15, 



PREFACE. 



sri 



But now, how clear, limpid, and pure, the streams are, that flow from the Greek and 
Hebrew fountains, through the channels of protestant pens, the reader may easily guess 
without taking the pains of comparing them, from the testimonies they themselves bear 
of one another's translations. 

Zuinglius writes thus to Luther, concerning his corrupt translation;* "Thou corrupt- 
est the word of God, O Luther ; thou art seen to be a manifest and common corrupter 
and perverter of the Holy Scripture ; how much are we ashamed of thee, who have 
hitherto esteemed thee beyond all measure, and prove thee to be such a man !" 

Luther's Dutch translation of the Old Testament, especially of Job and the prophets, 
has its blemishes, says Keckerman, and those no small ones,f neither are the blemishes 
in his New Testament to be accounted small ones ; one of which is, his omitting and 
wholly leaving out this text in St. John's Epistle ; " there be Three who give testimony 
in Heaven ; the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are One." Again, 
in Rom. 3. 28. he adds the word "alone" to the text, saying, " we account a man to be 
justified by faith alone, without the works of the law." Of which intolerable corruption 
being admonished, he persisted obstinate and wilful, saying, " So I will, so I command; 
let my will be instead of reason, &c."+ Luther will have it so ; and at last thus con= 
eludes, " The word alone, must remain in my New Testament, although all the papists 
run mad, they shall not take it from thence : it grieves me, that I did not add also those 
two other words, omnibus & omnium, sine omnibus operibus, omnium legum; without aU 
works of all laws." 

Again, in requital to Zuinglius, Luther rejects the Zuinglian translation, terming them, 
in matter of divinity, fools, asses, anti-christs, deceivers, &c.§ and indeed, not without 
cause; for what could be more deceitful and anti-christian, than instead of our Saviour's 
words, " this is my body," to translate " this signifies my body," as Zuinglius did, to 
maintain his figurative signification of the words, and cry down Christ's real presence in 
the blessed sacrament. 

When Froscheverus, the Zuinglian printer of Zurich, sent Luther a bible translated 
by the divines there, he would not receive it ; but as Hospinian and Lavatherus witness, 
sent it back, and rejected it.|| 

The Tigurine translation was, in like manner, so distasteful to other protestants, " that 
the elector of Saxony in great anger rejected it, and placed Luther's translation in room 
thereof."! 

Beza reproves the translation set forth by Oecolampadius, and the divines of Basil ; 
affirming, " that the Basil translation is in many places wicked, and altogether differing 
from the mind of the Holy Ghost." 

Castalio's translation is also condemned by** Beza, as being sacrilegious, wicked, and 
ethnical ; insomuch, that Castalio wrote a special treatise in defence of it : in the preface 
of which he thus complains : — " Some reject our Latin and French translations of the 
Bible, not only as unlearned, but also as wicked, and differing in many places from the 
mind of the Holy Ghost." 

That learned protestant, Molinceus, affirms of Calvin's translation, " that Calvin in his 
harmony, makes the text of the Gospel to leap up and down ; he uses violence to the 
letter of the Gospel ; and besides this, adds to the text."ff. 

And touching Beza's translation, which our English especially follow, the same Moli- 
noeus charges him, that " he actually changes the text ;" giving likewise several instances 
of his corruptions. Castalio also, " a learned Calvinist," as Osiander says, " and skilful 
in the tongues," reprehends Beza in a book wholly written against his corruptions ; and 
says further, " I will not note all his errors, for that would require too large a volume. 

In short, Bucer and the Osiandrians rise up against Luther for false translations; Lu- 
ther against Munster; Beza against Castalio ; and Castalio against Beza; Calvin against 
Servetus; lllyricus both against Calvin and Beza.§§ Staphylus and Emserus noted in 
Luther's Dutch translation of the New Testament only, about one thousand four hundred 
heretical corruptions. |||| And thus far of the confessed corruptions in foreign protestant 
translations. 

If you desire a character of our English protestant versions, pray be pleased to take 
it from the words of these following protestants ; some of the most zealous and precise 
of whom, in a certain treatise, entitled, " A Petition directed to his Most Excellent Ma- 

* Zuing. T. 2. ad Luth. lib. de S. f Keckerman, Syst. 8. Theol. lib. 2. p. 188. 1. S. 
Job. 5. 7. * To. 5. Germ. fol. 141, 144. § See Zuing. Tom. 2. ad Luth. lib. de Sacr.. 
fol. 388, 389. || Hosp. Hist. Sacram. part. ult. folio 183. Lavath. Hist. Sacram. 1. 32. 

Hospin. in Concord. Discord, fol. 138. ** In Respons. ad Defens. & Respons. Castal. 
in Test. 1556. in prxf. & in Annot. in Mat. 3. & 4. Luc. 2. Act. 8. 8t 10. 1 Cor. 1. ff In 
sua Translat. Nov. Test. part. 12. fol. 110. In Test. part. 20, 30, 40, 64, 65, 66, 74, 99, 
& part. 8, 13, 14, 21, 23. In Defens. Trans, p. 170. |||| See Lind. Dub. p. 84, 85, 96, 98, 



PREFACE, 



jesty King James the First, 5 * complain, " that our translation of the Psalms, comprised 
in our Book of Common Prayer, doth, in addition, subtraction, and alteration, differ from 
the truth of the Hebrew in, at least, two hundred places." If two hundred corruptions 
were found in the Psalms only, and that by protestants themselves, how many, think 
you, might be found from the beginning 1 of Genesis, to the end of the Apocalypse, if ex- 
amined by an impartial and strict examination ? And this they made the ground of their 
scruple, to make use of the Common Prayer ; remaining doubtful, "whether a man may, 
with a safe conscience, subscribe thereto :" Yea, they wrote and published a particular 
treatise, entitled, " A Defence of the Minister's Reasons for refusal of subscribing ;" the 
whole argument and scope whereof, is only concerning mis-translating : Yea, the reader 
may see, in the beginning of the said book, the title of every chapter, twenty -six in all, 
pointing to the mis-translations there handled in particular.* f 

Mr. Carlile avouches, " that the English translators have depraved the sense, ob- 
scured the truth, and deceived the ignorant : that in many places they detort the Scrip- 
tures from the right sense, and that they show themselves to love darkness more than 
light ; falsehood more than truth :" which Doctor Reynolds objecting against the church 
of England, Mr. Whitaker had no better answer than to say, " What Mr. Carlile, with 
some others, has written against some places translated in our Bibles, makes nothing to 
the purpose; 1 have not said otherwise, but that some things may be amended."* 

The ministers of Lincoln diocess could not forbear, in their great zeal, to signify to 
the King, that the English translation of the Bible, " is a translation that takes away from 
the text, that adds to the text, and that, sometimes, to the changing or obscuring of the 
meaning of the Holy Ghost;" calling it yet further, " a translation which is absurd and 
senseless, perverting, in many places, the meaning of the Holy Ghost. "§ 

For which cause, protestants of tender consciences made great scruple of subscribing 
thereto : " How shall I," says Mr. Burges, " approve under my hand, a translation which 
hath so many omissions, many additions, which sometimes obscures, sometimes perverts 
the sense ; being sometimes senseless, sometimes contrary ?"|| 

This great evil of corrupting the Scripture, being well considered by Mr. Broughton, 
one of the most zealous sort of protestants, obliged him to write an epistle to the Lords 
of the council, desiring them with all speed to procure a new translation : " Because,'* 
says he, " that which is now in England is full of errors."^ And in his advertisements 
of corruptions, he tells the bishops, " that their public translations of Scriptures into 
English is such, that it perverts the text of the Old Testament in eight hundred and 
forty-eight places, and that it causes millions of millions to reject the New Testament, 
and to run to eternal flames." A most dreadful saying, certainly, for all those who are 
forced to receive such a translation for their only rule of faith. 

King James the First thought the Geneva translation to be the worst of all ; and fur- 
ther affirmed, " that in the marginal notes annexed to the Geneva translation, some are 
very partial, untrue, seditious, &c.''** Agreeable to this are also these words of Mr. 
Parkes to Doctor Willet : — " As for the Geneva Bibles, it is to be wished, that either 
they were purged from those manifold errors which are both in the text and in the mar- 
gin, or else utterly prohibited." 

Now these our protestant English translations being thus confessedly " corrupt, ab- 
surd, senseless, contrary, and perverting the meaning of the Holy Ghost ;" had not King 
James the First just cause to affirm, " that he could never see a Bible well translated 
into English .""'ft And whether such falsely translated Bibles ought to be imposed upon 
the ignorant people, and by them received for the very Word of God, and for their only 
rule of faith, I refer to the judgment of the world ; and do freely assert with Doctor 
Whitaker, a learned protestant, " that translations are so far only the word of God, as 
they faithfully express the meaning of the authentical text."tt 

The English protestant translations having been thus exclaimed against, and cried 
down not only by catholics, but even by the most learned protestants,§§ as you have 
seen ; it pleased his majesty, King James the First, to command a review and reforma- 
tion of those translations which had passed for God's word in King Edward the Sixth, 
and Queen Elizabeth's days.j||| Which work was undertaken by the prelatic clergy, not 

* Petition directed to his Majestv, pag. 75, 76. -f That Christ descended into Hell, 
pag. 116, 117, 118. 121. 154. j Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, pag. 255. § See 
the Abridgment which the Ministers of Lincoln diocess delivered to his Majesty, pag. 
11, 12, 13. || Burges Apol. sect. 6. and in Covel's Answ. to Burges, pag. 93. 1 See 
the Triple Cord, pag. 147. ** See the Conference before the King's Majesty, pag. 46 
and 47. Apologies concerning Christ's Descent into Hell at Ddd. f\ Conference before 
his Majesty, pag. 46. 44 Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, pag. 235. §§ Dr. Gre- 
gory Martin wrote a whole treatise against them. |||| Bishop Tunstal discovered in Tin= 
dal's New Testament only, no less than 2000 corruptions. 



PREFACE. 



xiii 



so much, it is to be feared, for the zeal of truth, as appears by their having 1 corrected so 
very few places, as out of a design of correcting" such faults as favoured the more puritanic 
cal part of protestants (Presbyterians) against the usurped authority, pretended episco- 
pacy, ceremonies, and traditions of the prelatic party. For example: thb word " con- 
gregation" in their first Bibles, was the usual and only English word they made use of 
for the Greek and Latin word kxx«o-{'ct ecclesia, because then the name Df church was 
most odious to them ; yea, they could not endure to hear any mention of a church, be- 
cause of the catholic "church, which they had forsaken, and which withstood and con- 
demned them. But now, being grown up to something (as themselves fancy) like a 
church, they resolve in good earnest to take upon them the face, figure, aild grandeur of 
a church ; to censure and excommunicate, yea, and persecute their dissenting brethren ; 
rejecting therefore that humble appellation, which their primitive ancestors were con- 
tent with, viz. congregation, they assume the title of church, the church of England, to 
countenance which, they bring the word church again into their translations, and banish 
that their once darling congregation. 

They have also, instead of ordinances, institutions, &c. been pleased in some places 
to translate traditions ; thereby to vindicate several ceremonies of theirs against their 
puritanical brethren ; as in behalf of their character, they rectified, " ordaining elders, 
by election." 

The word* (image) being so shameful a corruption, they were pleased likewise to 
correct, and instead thereof to translate (idol,) according to the true Greek and Latin. 
Yet it appears that this was not amended out of any good design, or love of truth ; but 
either merely out of shame, or however to have it said that they had done something, 
Seeing they have not corrected it in all places, expecially in the Old Testament, Exod, 
20. where they yet read image, " Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image 
the word in Hebrew being pesel, the very same that sculptile is in Latin, and signifies in 
English a graven or carved thing ; and in the Greek it is eidolon, (an idol) : so that by 
this false and wicked practice, they endeavour to discredit the catholic religion ; and, 
contrary to their own consciences, and corrections in the New Testament, endeavour to 
make the people believe, that image and idol are the same, and equally forbidden by 
Scripture, and God's commandments ; and consequently, that popery is idolatry, for 
admitting the due use of images. 

They have also corrected that most absurd and shameful corruption, (grave) ; and, as 
they ought to do, have instead of it translated (hell,) so that now they read, " Thou 
wilt not leave my soul in Hell ;" whereas, Beza has it, " Thou wilt not leave my carcass 
in the grave." Yet we see, that this is not out of any sincere intention, or respect to 
truth neither, because they have but corrected it in some few places, not in all, as you 
will see hereafter ; which they would not do, especially in Genesis, lest they should 
thereby be forced to admit of Limbus Patrum, where Jacob's soul was to descend, when 
he said, " I will go down to my son into Hell mourning," &c. And to balance the ad- 
vantage they think they may have given catholics where they have corrected it, they 
have (against Purgatory and Limbus Patruni) in another place most grossly corrupted 
the text : for whereas the words of our Saviour are, " Quickened in spirit or soul. In 
the which spirit coming, he preached to them also that were in prison,"* they translate, 
" Quickened by the spirit, by which also he went and preached unto the spirits in pri- 
son." This was so notorious a corruption, that Dr. Montague, afterwards bishop of 
Chichester and Norwich, reprehended Sir Henry Saville for it, to whose care the trans- 
lating of St. Peter's Epistle was committed : Sir Henry Saville told him plainly, that Dr, 
Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury, and Dr. Smith, bishop of Gloucester, corrupted and 
altered the translation of this place, which himself had sincerely performed. Note here, 
by the bye, that if Dr. Abbot's conscience could so lightly suffer him to corrupt the 
Scripture, his, or his servant Mason's forging the Lambeth Records, could not possibly 
cause the least scruple, especially being a thing so highly for their interest and honour. 

These are the chiefest faults they have corrected in this their new translation ; and 
with what sinister designs they have amended them, appears visible enough ; to wit, either 
to keep their authority, and gain credit for their new-thought-on episcopal and priestly 
character and ceremonies against puritans or presbyterians ; or else, for very shame, 
urged thereto by the exclamations of catholics, daily inveighing against such intolerable 
falsifications. But because they resolved not to correct either all, or the tenth part of 
the corruptions of the former translations ; therefore, fearing their over-seen falsifications 
would be observed, both by puritans and catholics, in their Epistle Dedicatory to the 
King, they desire his majesty's protection, for that " on the one side, we shall be tra- 
duced, say they, by popish persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, 
because we are poor instruments to make God's holy truth to be yet more known unto 



* 1 Peter 3. ver. 18, 19. 



PKEFACEc 



the people whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness : on the other side* 
W£ shall be maligned by self-conceited brethren, who run their own ways, &c." 

We see how they endeavour here to persuade the king- and the world, that catholics 
are desirous to conceal the light of the Gospel : whereas, on the contrary, nothing is 
more obvious, than the daily and indefatigable endeavours of catholic missioners and 
priests, not only in preaching and explaining God's holy word in Europe ; but also in 
forsaking their own countries and conveniencies, and travelling with great difficulties 
and dangers by sea and land, into Asia, Africa, America, and the Antipodes, with no other 
design than to publish the doctrine of Christ, and to discover and manifest the light of 
the Gospel to infidels, who are in darkness and ignorance. Nor do any but catholics 
stick to the old letter and sense of Scripture, without altering the text, or rejecting any 
part thereof, or devising new interpretations; which certainly cannot demonstrate a 
desire in them to keep people in ignorance and darkness. Indeed, as for their self- 
conceited presbyterian and fanatic brethren, who run their own ways in translating and 
interpreting Scripture, we do not excuse them, but only say, that we see no reason why 
prelatics should reprehend them for a fault, whereof themselves are no less guilty. Do 
not themselves of the church of England run their own ways also : as well as those other 
sectaries in translating the Bible ? Do they stick to either the Greek, Latin, or Hebrew 
text ? Do they not leap from one language and copy to another ? Accept and reject 
what they please ? Do they not fancy a sense of their own, every whit as contrary to 
that of the Catholic and ancient church, as that of their self-conceited brethren the pres- 
byterians, and others, is acknowledged to be ? And yet they are neither more learned 
nor more skilful in the tongues, nor more godly than those they so much contemn and 
blame. 

All heretics that have ever waged war against God's Holy church, whatever particu- 
lar weapons they have had, have generally made use of these two, viz. " Misrepresenting 
and ridiculing the doctrine of God's church ;" and, " Corrupting and misinterpreting 
his sacred word, the Holy Scripture :" We find not any since Simon Magus's days, that 
have ever been more dexterous and skilful in handling these direful arms, than the here- 
tics of our times. 

In the first place, they are so great masters and doctors in misrepresenting, mocking, 
and deriding religion, that they seem even to have solely devoted themselves to no 
other profession or place, but " cathedrx ivrisorum," the school or " chair of the scorn- 
ers," as David terms their seat : which the holy apostle St. Peter foresaw, when he fore- 
told, that " There should come in the latter days, illusores, scoffers, walking after their 
own lusts." To whom did this prophecy ever better agree, than to the heretics of our 
days, who deride the sacred Scriptures ? " The author of the book of Ecclesiastes, 
says one of them, had neither boots nor spurs, but rid on a long stick, in begging shoes :" 
Who scoff at the book of Judith : compare the Maccabees to Robin Hood and Bevis of 
Southampton; call Baruch, a "peevish ape of Jeremy:" count the Epistle to the Hebrews 
as stubble : and deride St. James's, as an epistle made of straw : contemn three of the 
four Gospels. What ridiculing is this of the word of God ! Nor were the first pre- 
tended reformers only guilty of this, but the same vein has still continued in the writings, 
preachings, and teachings of their successors ; a great part of which are nothing but a 
mere mockery, ridiculing, and misrepresenting of the doctrine of Christ, as is too noto- 
rious and visible in the many scurrilous and scornful writings and sermons lately pub« 
lished by several men of no small figure in our English protestant church. By which 
scoffing stratagem, when they cannot laugh the vulgar into a contempt and abhorrence 
of the Christian religion, they fly to their other weapons, to wit, " imposing upon the 
people's weak understanding, by a corrupt, imperfect, and falsely translated Bible."* ' 

Tertullian complained thus of the heretics of his time, 1st a hceresis non recipit quasdam 
Scripturas, &c. " These heretics admit not some books of Scriptures ; and those which 
they do admit, by adding to, and taking from, they pervert to serve their purpose : and 
if they receive some books, yet they receive them not entirely ; or if they receive them 
entirely, after some sort, nevertheless, they spoil them by devising divers interpretations. 
In this case, what will you do, that think yourselves skilful in Scriptures, when that 
which you defend, the adversary denies ; and that which you deny, he defends ?" Et tu 
quidem nihil perdes nisi vocem de contentione, nihil consequeris nisi bilem de blasphematione t 
" And you indeed shall lose nothing but words in this contention ; nor shall you gain any 
thing but anger from his blasphemy." How fitly may these words be applied to the pre- 
tended reformers of our days ! who, when told of their abusing, corrupting, and misin- 
terpreting the Holy Scriptures, are so far from acknowledging their faults, that on the 
contrary they blush not to defend them. When Mr. Martin, in his Discovery, told them 
of their falsifications in the Bible, did they thank him for letting them see their mistakes^ 



* Dr. St, Dr. T. Dr. S. Dr. T. Mr. W. &c. 



PREFACE. 



XV 



as indeed men, endued with the spirit of sincerity and honesty would have done ? No, 
they were so far from that, that Fulk, as much as in him lies, endeavours very obstinate- 
ly to defend them : and Whitaker affirms, that " their translations are well done," (why 
then were they afterwards corrected ?) " and that all the faults Mr. Martin finds in them 
are but trifles ; demanding what there is in their Bibles that can be found fault with, as 
not translated well and truly ?"* Such a pertinacious, obstinate, and contentious spirit, 
are heretics possessed with, which indeed is the very thing that renders them heretics ; 
for with such I do not rank those in the list, who, though they have even with their first 
milk, as I may say, imbibed their errors, and have been educated from their childhood 
in erroneous opinions, yet do neither pertinaciously adhere to the same, nor obstinately 
resist the truth, when proposed to them ; but, on the contrary, are willing to embrace it, 

How many innocent, and well-meaning people, are there in England, who have scarce 
in all their life-time, ever heard any mention of a catholic, or catholic religion, unless 
under these monstrous and frightful terms of idolatry, superstition, antichristianism, &c. ? 
How many have ever heard a better character of catholics, than bloody-minded people, 
thirsters after blood, worshippers of wooden gods, prayers to stocks and stones, idola- 
tors, anti-christs, the beast in the Revelations, and what not, that may render them more 
odious than Hell, and more frightful than the Devil himself, and that from the mouths 
and pens of their teachers, and ministerial guides ? Is it then to be wondered at, that 
these so grossly deceived people should entertain a strange prejudice against religion, 
and a detestation of catholics ? 

Whereas, if these blind-folded people were once undeceived, and brought to under- 
stand, that all these monstrous scandals are falsely charged upon catholics ; that the 
catholic doctrine is so far from idolatry, that it teaches quite the contrary, viz. That who- 
soever gives God's honour to stocks and stones, as protestants phrase it, to images, to 
saints, to angels, or to any creature ; yea, to any thing but to God himself, is an idolator, 
and will be damned for the same ; that catholics are so far from thirsting after the blood 
of others, that, on the contrary, their doctrine teaches them, not only to love God above 
all, and their neighbour as themselves, but even to love their enemies. In short, so far 
different is the Roman catholic religion from what it is by protestants represented, that, 
on the contrary, faith, hope, and charity, are the three divine virtues it teaches us : pru- 
dence, justice, fortitude, and temperance, are the four moral virtues it exhorts us to : 
which Christian virtues, when it happens that they are, through human frailty, and the 
temptations of our three enemies, the world, the flesh, and the Devil, either wounded 
or lost ; then are we taught to apply ourselves to such divine remedies, as our blessed 
Saviour Christ has left us in his church, viz. his holy sacraments, by which our spiritual 
infirmities are cured and repaired. By the sacrament of baptism we are taught, that 
original sin is forgiven, and that the party baptized is regenerated, and born anew unto 
the mystical body of Christ, of which by baptism he is made a lively member : so like- 
wise by the sacrament of penance all our actual sins are forgiven ; the same holy Spirit 
of God working in this to the forgiveness of actual sin, that wrought before in the sacra- 
ment of baptism to the forgiveness of original sin. We are taught, likewise, that by 
partaking of Christ's very body, and his very blood, in the blessed sacrament of the 
Eucharist, we by a perfect union dwell in Him, and He in us ; and that as himself rose 
again for our justification, so we, at the day of judgment, shall in him receive a glorious 
resurrection, and reign with him for all eternity, as glorious members of the same body^ 
whereof himself is the head. It further teaches us, that none but a priest, truly con- 
secrated by the holy sacrament of order, can consecrate and administer the holy sacra- 
ments. — This is our religion, this is the centre it tends to, and the sole end it aims at ; 
which point, we are further taught, can never be gained but by a true faith, a firm hope, 
and a perfect charity. 

To conclude, if, I say, thousands of well-meaning protestants understood this, as also 
that protestancy itself is nothing else but a mere imposture begun in England, main- 
tained and upheld by the wicked policy of self-interested statesmen ; and still continued 
by misrepresenting and ridiculing the catholic religion, by misinterpreting the holy 
Scriptures ; yea, by falsifying, abusing, and, as will appear in this following treatise, by 
most abominably corrupting the sacred word of God : how far would it be from them 
obstinately and pertinaciously to adhere to the false and erroneous principles, in which 
they have hitherto been educated ? how willingly would they submit their understand- 
ings to the obedience of faith ? how earnestly would they embrace that rule of faith, 
which our blessed Saviour and his apostles, left us for our guide to salvation ? with what 
diligence would they bend all their studies, to learn the most wholesome and saving doc- 
trine of God's holy church ? In fine, if once enlightened with a true faith, and encouraged 

* Whitaker, page 14, 



xvi 



PREFACE. 



with a firm hope, what zealous endeavours would they not use to acquire such virtues 
and Christian perfections, as might enflame them with a perfect charity, which is the 
very ultimate and highest step to eternal felicity ? To which, may God of his infinite 
goodness, and tender mercy, through the merits and bitter death and passion of our dear 
"Saviour, Jesus Christ, bring us all. Amen. 



THE 

f i I S I 

OF 

PROTESTANT 

TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE 
EXAMINED. 



OCR pretended reformers, having" squared and modelled to themselves a Faith, con= 
trary to the certain and direct Rule of Apostolical tradition, delivered in God's holy church, 
were forced to have recourse to the scripture, as their only rule of faith according to 
which, the church of England has, in the sixth of her 39 Articles, declared, that the 
scripture comprehended in the canonical books (i. e. so many of them as she thinks fit 
to call so) of the Old and New Testament, is the rule of faith so far, that whatsoever is 
not read therein, or cannot be proved thereby, is not to be accepted as any point of 
faith, or needful to be followed. But finding- themselves still at a loss, their new doc- 
trines being so far from being contained in the Holy Scripture, that they were directly 
opposite to it; they were fain to seek out to themselves many other inventions ; amongst 
which, none was more generally practised, than the corrupting of the Holy Scripture by 
false and partial translations ; by which they endeavoured, right or wrong, to make those 
sacred volumes speak in favour of their new-invented faith and doctrine. 

The corruptions of this nature, in the first English Protestant translations, were so 
many, and so notorious, that Dr. Gregory Martin composed a whole book of them, in 
which he discovers the fraudulent shifts the translators were fain to make use of, in de- 
fence of them. Sometimes they recurred to the Hebrew text ; and when that spoke 
against their new doctrine, then to the^Greek ; when that favoured them not, to some 
copy acknowledged by themselves to be corrupted, and of no credit : and when no copy 
at all could be found out to cloak their corruptions, then must the book or chapter of 
scripture contradicting them, be declared Apocryphal : and when that cannot be made 
probable, they fall downright upon the Prophets and Apostles that wrote them, saying, 
That they might, and did err, even after the coming of the Holy Ghost.* Thus Luther, j 
accused by Zuinglius for corrupting the word of God, had no way left to defend his 
impiety, but by impudently preferring himself, and his own spirit, before that of those 
who wrote the Holy Scriptures, saying, Be it that the church, Augustine and other doc- 
tors, also Peter and Paul, yea, an angel from heaven, teach otherwise, yet is my doctrine 



* Vid. Supr. 

f Tom. 5. Wittemb, fol. 290. S; in Ep. ad Gal&t. cap. 1, 



2 



A 1 R T E S T A NT T R A N S L A T I O V S 



such as sets forth God's glory, &c. Peter, the chief of the Apostles, lived and taught 
(extra verbum dei,) besides the word of God. 

And against St. James's mentioning the sacrament of extreme unction :* But though,, 
(says he,) this were the Epistle of James, I would answer, that it is not lawful for an 
apostle, by his authority, to institute a sacrament ; this appertains to Christ alone. As 
though that blessed Apostle would publish a sacrament without warrant from Christ ! 
Our church of England divines having unadvisedly put St. James's epistle into the canon, 
are forced, instead of such an answer, to say, That the sacrament of extreme unction 
was yet [viz. in the days of Gregory the Great,] unformed.f As though the apostle St, 
James had spoken he knew not what, when he advised, That the sick should be, by the 
priests of the church, anointed with oil in the name of our Lord. 

Nor was this Luther's shift alone ; for all Protestants follow their first pretended re- 
former in this point, being necessitated so to do for the maintenance of their reformations 
and translations, so directly opposite to the known letter of the Scripture. 

The Magdeburgians follow Luther, in accusing the apostles of error, particularly St, 
Paul, by the persuasion of James. £ 

Brentius also (whom Jewel terms a grave and learned father,) affirms, That St. Peter, 
the chief of the apostles, and also Barnabas, after the Holy Ghost received, together 
with the church of Jerusalem, erred. 

John Calvin§ affirms, That Peter added to the schism of the church, to the endanger- 
ing of Christian liberty, and the overthrow of the grace of Christ : and in page 150, he 
reprehends Peter and Barnabas, and others. 

Zanchius mentions some Calvinists in his Epist. ad Misc. who said, If Paul should 
come to Geneva, and preach the same hour with Calvin, they would leave Paul, and 
hear Calvin. 

And Lavatherus'l affirms, that some of Luther's followers, not the meanest among their 
doctors, said, They had rather doubt of St. Paul's doctrine, than the doctrine of Luther^ 
or of the confession of Ausburg. 

This desperate shift being so necessary, for warranting their corruptions of Scripture, 
and maintaining the fallibility of the church in succeeding age^, (for the same reasons 
which conclude it infallible in the apostle's time, are applicable to ours, and to every for- 
mer century ; otherwise it must be said, that God's providence and promises were 
limited to few years, and Himself so partial, that he regards not the necessities of his 
church, nor the salvation of any person that lived after the time of his disciples ;) the 
church of England could not reject it without contradicting their brethren abroad, and 
their own principles at home. Therefore Mr. Jewel, in his Defence of the Apology for 
the Church of England,! affirms, That St. Mark mistook Abiathar for Abimelech ; and 
St. Matthew, Hieremias for Zacharias. And Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament, 
in Galat. 2/fol. 322, charges Peter with error of ignorance against the gospel. 

Dr. Goad, in his four Disputations with F. Campion, affirms,** That St. Peter erred in 
faith, and that, after the sending down of the Holy Ghost upon them. And Whitaker 
says,1i" It i s evident, that even after Christ's ascension, and the Holy Ghost's descending 
upon the apostles, the whole church, not only the common sort of Christians, but also 
even the apostles themselves, erred in the vocation of the Gentiles, &c. Yea, Peter also 
erred. He furthermore erred in manners, &.c. And these were great errors ; and yet 
we see these to have been in the apostles, even after the Holy Ghost descended upon 
them. 

Protestants to authorize thjsir own errors and fallibility, would make the apostles themselves 
erroneous and fallible. — Thus these fallible reformers, who, to countenance their corrup- 
tions of Scripture, grace 1 their own errors, and authorize their church's fallibility, would 
make the apostles themselves fallible but, indeed, they need not to have gone this bold 
way to work, for we are satisfied, and can very easily believe their church to be fallible, 
their doctrines erroneous, and themselves corrupters of the Scriptures, without being 
forced to hold, that the apostles erred. 



* De Capt. Babil. cap. de Extrem. Unct. Tom. 2. Wittemb. 

f See the second Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of Eng* 
land, &c. 

* Cent. 1. 1. 2. c. 10. col. 580. 

§ Calvin in Galat. c. 2, v. 14, p. 511. 

|| Lavater. in Histor. Sacrament, page 18, 

f Page 361. 

** The second day's conference. 

ft Whitaker de Eccles, contr, BeUar, Controvers, 2. q, 4. p. 223v. 



OF THE SCRIPTURES. 



s 



And tmly, if, as they say, the apostles were not only fallible, but taught errors in 
manners, and matters of faith, after the Holy Ghost's descending" upon them, their wri- 
tings can be no infallible rule, (or, as themselves term it, perfect rule of faith,) to direct 
men to salvation : which conclusion is so immediately and clearly deduced from this pro- 
testant doctrine, that the supposal and premises once granted, there can be no certainty 
in the Scripture itself. And, indeed, this (we see) all the pretended reformers aimed 
at, though they durst not say so much, and we shall in this little tract make it most 
evidently appear from their intolerably abusing it, how little esteem and slight regard 
they have for the sacred Scripture ; though they make their ignorant flock believe, 
that, as they have translated it, and delivered it to them, it is the pure and infallible 
word of God. 

Before I come to particular examples of their falsifications and corruptions, let me ad- 
vertise my reader, that my intention is to make use only of such English translations, as 
are common, and well known in England even to this day, as being yet in many men's 
hands ; to wit, those Bibles printed in the years 1562, 1577, and 1579, in the beginning 
of queen Elizabeth's reign ; which I will confront with their last translation made in 
king James the first's reign, from the impression printed at London in the year 1683. 

In all which said Bibles, I shall take notice sometimes of one translation, sometimes 
of another, as every one's falsehood shall give occasion : neither is it a good defence for 
the falsehood of one, that it is truly translated in another, the reader being deceived by 
any one, because commonly he reads but one ; yea, one of them is a condemnation of 
the other. And where the English corruptions, here noted, are hot to be found in one 
of the first three Bibles, let the reader look in another of them ; for if he find not the 
falsification in all, he will certainly find it in two, or at least one of them : and, in this 
case, I advertise the reader to be very circumspect, that he think not, by and by, these 
are falsely charged, because there may be found perhaps some later edition, wherein 
the same error we noted, may be corrected ; for it is their common and known fashion, 
not only in their translations of the Bible, but in their other books and writings, to alter 
and change, add and put ou t, in their later editions, according as either themselves are 
ashamed of the former, or their scholars that print them again, dissent or disagree from 
their masters. 

Note also, that though I do not so much charge them with falsifying the Vulgar Latin 
Bible, which has always been of so great authority in the church of God, and with all 
the ancient fathers,* as 1 do the Greek, which they pretend to translate : I cannot, how- 
ever, but observe, that as Luther wilfully forsook the Latin text in favour of his heresies 
and erroneous doctrines ; so the rest follow his example even to this day, for no other 
cause in the world, but that it makes against their errors. 

For testimony of which, what greater argument can there be than this, that Luther, 
who before had always read with the Catholic church, and with all antiquity, these words 
of St. Paul, Have not we power to lead about a woman, a sister, as also the rest of the 
apostles ?f And in St. Peter, these words, Labour, that by good works, you may make 
sure your vocation and election :+ suddenly after he had, contrary to his profession, 
taken a wife, (as he called her,) and preached, that all other votaries might do the same : 
that faith alone justified, and that good works were not necessary to salvation : imme- 
diately, I say, after he fell into these heresies, he began to read and translate the former 
texts of Scripture accordingly, in this manner, — Have not we power to lead about a 
sister, a wife, as the rest of the apostles ? And, Labour, that you may make sure your 
vocation and election ; leaving out the other words, [by good works.] And so do both 
the Calvinists abroad, and our English protestants at home, read and translate even to 
this day, because they hold the self-same errors. 

I would gladly know of our English protestant translators, whether they reject the 
Vulgar Latin text, (so generally liked and approved by all the primitive fathers) purely 
out of design to furnish us with a more sincere and simple version into English from the 
Greek, than they thought they could do from the Vulgar Latin ? If so, why do they not 
stick close to the Greek copy, which they pretend to translate, but (besides their cor- 
rupting of it) fly from it, and have recourse again to the Vulgar Latin, whenever it 
may seem to make more for their purpose : whence may be easily gathered, that their 
pretending to translate the Greek copy was not of any good and candid design, but 
rather, because they knew it was not so easy a matter for the ignorant to discover their 
false dealings from it as from the Latin ; and, also, because they might have the fairer 



* See the preface of the Rheims New Testament, 
f 1 Cor. 9. v. 5. Mulierem Sororem. 

* 2 Pet. 1. ver. 10. Ut per bona opera certam restrain vocationem & electionem 
faciatis. 



1 



Vrotestant translations 



pretence for their turning and winding to and fro from the Greek to the Latin, atid then 
again to the Greek, according as they should judge most advantageous to them. It Was 
also no little part of their design, to lessen the credit and authority of the Vulgar Latin 
translation, which had so long, and with so general a consent, been received and ap- 
proved in the church of God, and authorized by the general Council of Trent, for the 
only best and most authentic text. 

Because therefore I find they will scarcely be able to justify their rejecting the Latin 
translation, unless they had dealt more sincerely with the Greek, I have, in the following- 
work, set down the Latin text, (as well as the Greek word whereon their corruption de- 
pends ;) yet, where they truly keep to the Greek and Hebrew, which they profess to 
follow, and which they will have to be the most authentic text, I do not charge them 
with heretical corruptions. 

The left-hand page I hawe divided into four columns, (besides the Margin, in which 
I have noted the book, chapter, and verse.) In the first I have set down the text of 
Scripture from the Vulgar Latin edition, putting the word that their English Bibles have 
corrupted in a different character; to which 1 have also added the Greek and Hebrew 
words, so often as they are, or may be necessary for the better understanding of the 
word on which the stress lies in the corrupt translation. 

In the second column I have given you the true English text from the Roman Catho- 
lic translation, made by the Divines of Rheims and Doway ; which is done so faithfully 
and candidly from the authentic Vulgar Latin copy, that the most carping and critical 
adversary in the world cannot accuse it of partiality or design, contrary to the very 
true meaning and interpretation thereof. As for the English of the said Rhemish trans- 
lation, which is old, and therefore must needs differ much from the more refined English 
spoken at this day, the reader ought to consider, not only the place where it was written, 
but also the time since which the translation was made, and then he will find the less 
fault with it. For my part, because 1 have referred my reader to the said translation 
made at Rheims, I have not altered one syllable of the English, though indeed 1 might 
in some places have made the word more agreeable to the language of our times. 

In the third column you have the corruption, and false translation, from those bibles 
that were set forth in English at the beginning of that most miserable revolt and apes- 
tacy from the Catholic church, viz. from that bible which was translated in king Ed- 
ward the sixth's time, and reprinted in the year 1562, and from the two next impressions, 
made anno 1577, and 1579. All which were authorized in the beginning of qUeen Eliza- 
beth's reign, when the church of England began to get footing, and to exercise domin- 
ion over her fellow-sectaries, as well as to tyrannise over Catholics : whence it cannot 
be denied, but those bibles were wholly agreeable to the principles and doctrine of the 
said church of England in those days, however they pretend at this day to correct or 
alter them. 

In the fourth column you find one of the last impressions of their protestant Bible, 
viz. that printed at London by the assigns of John Bill deceased, and by Henry Hills 
and Thomas Newcomb, printers to the king's most excellent majesty, anno dom. 16S3. 
In which Bible, wherever I find them to have corrected and amended the place cor- 
rupted in their former translations, 1 have put down the word [corrected ;] but where 
the falsification is not yet rectified, 1 have set down likewise the corruption : and that 
indeed is in most places, yea, and in some two or three places, they have made it rather 
worse than better : and this indeed gives me great reason to suspect, that in those few 
places, where the errors of the former false translations have been corrected in the lat- 
ter, it has not always been the effect of plain-dealing and sincerity ; for if such candid 
intention of amending former faults had everywhere prevailed with them, they would 
not in any place have made it worse, but would also have corrected all the rest, as well 
as one or two that are not now so much to their purpose, as they were at their first rising. 

In the right-hand page of this treatise, I have set down the motives and inducements, 
that (as we may reasonably presume) prompted them to corrupt and falsify the sacred 
text, with some short arguments here and there against their unwarrantable proceedings. 

All which I have contrived in as short and compendious a method as I possibly could, 
knowing that there are many, who are either not able, or at least not willing to go to the 
price of a great volume. And because my desire is to be beneficial to all, I have accom- 
modated it not only to the purse of the poorest, but also, (as near as possible) to the 
capacity of the most ignorant ; for which reasons also, I have past by a great many learn- 
ed arguments brought by my author,* from the significations, etymologies, derivations, 
uses, &c. of the Greek and Hebrew words, as also from the comparing of places corrupt- 
ed, with other places rightly translated from the same word, in the same translation ; 



* Dr. Martin. 



OF THE SCRIPTURES. 



with several other things, whereby lie largely confutes their insincere and disingenuous 
proceedings : these, I say, I have omitted, not only for brevity sake, but also as things 
that could not be of any great benefit to the simple and unlearned reader. 

As for others more learned, I will refer them to the work itself, that I have made use 
of through this whole treatise, viz. to that most elaborate and learned work of Mr. Gre- 
gory Martin, entitled, A Discovery of the manifold Corruptions cf the Holy Scriptures, 
&c. printed at Rheims, anno 1582, which is not hard to be found. 

Have we not great cause to believe, that our Protestant divines do obstinately teach, 
contrary to their own consciences ? For, (besides their having been reproved, without 
amendment, for their impious handling the Holy Scripture,) if their learning be so pro- 
found and bottomless, as themselves proudly boast in all their works, we cannot but con 
elude, that they must needs both see their errors, and know the truth. And therefore, 
though we cannot alwa} s cry cut of them, and their followers, [the blind lead the blind,] 
yet, which is, alas ! a thousand times more miserable, we may justiy exclaim, [those who 
see, lead the blind, till with themselves they fall into the ditch !] 

As nothing has ever been worse resented by such as forsake God's holy church, than 
to hear themselves branded with the general title of heretics ; so nothing has been ever 
more common among catholics, than justly to stigmatize such with the same infamous 
character. I am not ignorant, how ill the protestants of our days resent this term, and 
therefore do avoid, as much as the nature of this work will permit, the giving them the 
least disgust by this horrid appellation : nevertheless I must needs give them to under- 
stand, that the nature of the Holy Scripture is such, that whosoever do voluntarily cor- 
ruptand pervert it, to maintain their own erroneous doctrines, cannot lightly be charac- 
terized by a less infamous title, than that of heretics ; and their false versions by the title 
of heretical translations, under which denomination I have placed these following cor- 
ruptions. 

Notwithstanding, I would have the protestant reader to take notice, that I neither 
name nor judge all to be heretics "(as is hinted in my preface,) who hold errors contra- 
dictory to God's church, but such as pertinaciously persist in their errors. 

So proper and essential is pertinacity to the nature of heresy, that if a man should hold 
or believe ever so many false opinions against the truth of Christian faith, but yet not 
with obstinacy and pertinacity, he should err, but not be a heretic. Saint Augustin 
asserting,* That if any do defend their opinions, though false and perverse, with no ob- 
stinate animosity, but rather with all solicitude do seek the truth, and are ready to be 
corrected when they find the same, these men are not to be accounted for heretics, be- 
cause they have not any election of their own that contradicts the doctrine of the church, 
And in another place, against the Donatists:f Let us (says he) suppose some man to 
hold that of Christ at this day, which the heretic Photinus did, to wit, That Christ was 
only man, and not God, and that he should think this to be the Catholic faith ; I will not 
say that he is a heretic, unless when the doctrine of the church is made manifest unto 
him, he will rather choose to hold that which he held before, than yield thereunto. 

Again, those, says he,^ who in the church of Christ, hold infectious and perverse doc- 
trine, if, wiien they are corrected for it, they resist stubbornly, and will not amend their 
pestilent and deadly persuasions, but persist to defend the same, these men are made 
heretics : by all which places of St. Augustin, we see that error without pertinacity, and 
obstinacy against God's church, is no heresy. It would be well, therefore, if Protestants^ 
in reading Catholic books, would endeavour rather to inform themselves of the truth of 
Catholic doctrine, and humbly embrace the same, than to suffer that prejudice against 
religion, in which they have unhappily been educated, so strongly to biass them, as to 
turn them from men barely educated in error, to obstinate heretics; such as the more 
to harden their own hearts, by how much the more clearly the doctrine of God's Holy 
church is demonstrated to them, When the true faith is once made known to men, 
ignorance can no longer secure them from that eternal punishment to which heresy un- 
doubtedly hurries them : St. Paul, in his epistle to Titus, affirming,^ that " a man that is 
a heretic after the first and second admonition, is subverted, and sinneth, being con- 
demned of his own judgment." 

Whatever may be said, therefore, to excuse the ignorant, and such as are not obsti- 
nate, from that ignominious character ; yet as for others, especially the leaders of these 
misguided people, they will scarcely be able to free themselves either from it, or escape 
the punishment due to such, so long as they thus wilfully demonstrate their pertinacity, 
not only in their obstinately defending their erroneous doctrines in their disputes, ser- 



* S. Aug. Ep. 162. 

4 De Civit Dei, lib. 18. c. 51, 



f Lib. 4. contr. Donat. c, 6. 
§ Titus, cap. 3. ver. 10, 



6 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 



mons, arid writings ; but even in corrupting the Word of God, to force that sacred book 
to defend the same, and compel that divine volume to speak against such points of Ca- 
tholic doctrine as themselves are pleased to deny. 

In what can a heretical intention more evidently appear, than in falsely translating 
and corrupting the Koly Bible, against the Catholic church, and such doctrines as it 
has, by an uninterrupted tradition, brought down to us from the apostles? as for example : 



Against the holy sacrifice of the altar 1 

Against the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the eucharist 2 

Against priests, and the power of priesthood 3 

Against the authority of bishops • 4 

Against the sacred altar on which Christ's body and blood is offered 5 

Against the sacrament of baptism 6 

Against the sacrament of penance, and confession of sins. • 7 

Against the sacrament of marriage • 8 

Against intercession of saints •• 9 

Against sacred images •• • 10 

Against purgatory, limbus patrum, and Christ's descent into hell «. 11 

Against justification, and the possibility of keeping God's commandments 12 

Against meritorious works, and the reward due to the same ••• 13 

Against free will * • • 14 

Against true inherent justice, and in defence of their own doctrine, that 

faith alone is sufficient for salvation 15 

Against apostolical traditions ...a 16 



Yea, against several other doctrines of God's holy church, and in defence of divers 
strange opinions of their own, which the reader will find taken notice of in this treatise : 
all which, when the unprejudiced and well-meaning protestant reader has considered, 
I am confident he will be struck with amazement, and even terrified to look upon such 
abominable corruptions ! 

Doubtless the generality of protestants have hitherto been ignorant, and more is the 
pity, of this ill-handling of the Bible by their translators : nor have, I am confident, 
their ministerial guides ever yet dealt so ingenuously by them, as to tell them that such 
and such a text of Scripture is translated thus and thus, contrary to the true Greek, He- 
brew, or ancient Latin copies on purpose, and to the only intent, to make it speak against 
such and such points of Catholic doctrine, and in favour of this or that new opinion of 
their own. 

Does it appear to be done by negligence, ignorance, or mistake, as perhaps they would 
be willing to have the reader believe, or rather designedly and wilfully, when what they 
in some places translate truly, in places of controversy between them and us, they 
grossly falsify, in favour of their errors ? 

Is it not a certain argument of a wilful corruption, where they deviate from that text, 
and ancient reading, which has been used by all the Fathers, and, instead thereof, to 
make the exposition or commentary of some one doctor, the very text of Scripture itself? 

So also when in their translations they fly from the Hebrew or Greek to the Vulgate 
Latin, where those originals make against them, or not so much for their purpose, it is a 
manifest sign of wilful partiality : And this they frequently do. 

What is it else but wilful partiality, when in words of ambiguous and divers significa- 
tions, they will have it signify here or there, as pleases themselves ? So that in this place 
it must signify thus, in that place, not thus ; as Beza, and one of their English Bibles, 
for example, urge the Greek word ywAix.*. to signify wife, and not to signify wife, 
both against the virginity and chastity of Priests. 

What is it but a voluntary and designed contrivance, when in a case that makes for 
them, they strain the very original signification of the word ; and in the contrary case, 
neglect it altogether ? Yet this they do. 

That their corruptions are voluntary and designedly done, is evident in such places 
where passives are turned into actives, and actives into passives , where participles are 
made to disagree in case from their substantives ; where solecisms are imagined when 
the construction is most agreeable ; and errors pretended to creep out of the margin 
into the text : But Beza made use of all these, and more such like quirks. 

Another note of wilful corruption is, when they do not translate alike such words as 
are of like form and force : Example — if Ulcerosus be read full of sores, why must not 
Gratiosa be translated full of grace ? 

When the words, images, shrines, procession, devotions, excommunications, &c. are 
used in ill part, where they are not in the original test ; and the words hymns, grace. 



OF THE SCRIPTURES. 



1 



mystery, sacrament, church, altar, priest, Catholic, justification, tradition, &c. avoided 
and suppressed, where they are in the original, as if no such words were in the text : la 
it not an apparent token of design, and that it is done purposely to disgrace or suppress 
the said things and speeches. 

Though Beza and Whitaker made it a good rule to translate according to the usual 
signification, and not the original derivations of words ; yet, contrary to this rule, they 
translate idolam, an image ; presbyter, an elder ; diaconus, a minister ; episcopus, an over- 
seer, &c. Who sees not therefore but this is wilful partiality ? 

If where the apostle names a pagan idolator, and a Christian idolator, by one and the 
same Greek word, in one and the same meaning ; and they translate the pagan, (idola- 
tor) and the Christian, (worshipper of images) by two distinct words, and in two divers 
meanings, it must needs be wilfully done. 

No less appears it to be less designedly done, to translate one and the same Greek word 
l<Bruf>*So<ri(] Tradition, whensoever it may be taken for evil traditions ; and never so, 
when it is spoken of good and apostolical traditions. 

So likewise when they foist into their translation the word tradition, taken in ill part, 
where it is not in the Greek ; and omit it where it is in the Greek, when taken in good 
part ; it is certainly a most wilful corruption. 

At their first revolt, when none were noted for schismatics and heretics but themselves, 
they translated division and sect, instead of schism and heresy ,• and for heretic translated 
an author of sects : This cannot be excused for voluntary corruption. 

But why should I multiply examples, when it is evident from their own confessions and 
acknowledgments ? For instance, concerning peJctvouTt, which the Vulgar Latin and 
and Erasmus translate, Agite Poenitentiam, do penance : This interpretation (says Beza) 
I refuse for many causes ; but for this especially, That many ignorant persons have taken 
hereby an occasion of the false opinions of satisfaction, wherewith the church is troubled 
at this day 

Many other ways there are, to make most certain proofs of their wilfulness ; as when 
the translation is framed according to their false and heretical commentary ; and when 
they will avouch their translations out of prophane writers, as Homer, Plutarch, Pliny, 
Tully, Virgil, and Terence, and reject the ecclesiastical use of words in the Scriptures 
and Fathers ; which is Beza's usual custom, whom our English translators follow. But 
to note all their marks were too tedious a work, neither is it in this place necessary : 
These are sufficient to satisfy the impartial reader, that all those corruptions and falsifi- 
cations were not committed either through negligence, ignorance, over-sight, or mis- 
take, as perhaps they will be glad to pretend; but designedly, wilfully, and of a mali- 
cious purpose and intention, to disgrace, dishonour, condemn, and suppress the churches 
catholic and apostolic doctrines and principles ; and to favour, defend, and bolster-up 
their own new-devised errors and monstrous opinions. And Beza is not far from con- 
fessing thus much, when, against Castalio, he thus complains : The matter (says he) is 
now come to this point, that the translators of scripture out of the Greek into Latin, or 
into any other tongue, think that they may lawfully do any thing in translating ; whom if 
a man reprehend, he shall be answered by and by, That they do the office of a translator, 
not that translates word for word, but that expresses the sense : So it comes to pass, that 
whilst every man will rather freely follow his own judgment, than be a religious inter- 
preter of the Holy Ghost, he rather perverts many things than translates them. This is 
spoken well enough, if he had done accordingly. But doing quite the contrary, is he 
not a dissembling hypocrite in so saying, and a wilful heretic in so doing ? 

Our quarrel with Protestant translators is not for trivial or slight faults, or for such 
rerbal differences, or little escapes as may happen through the scarce-unavoidable mis- 
takes of the transcribers or printers : No ! we accuse them of wilfully corrupting and fal- 
sifying the sacred text, against points of faith and maimers. 

We deny not that several immaterial faults and depravations may enter a translation, 
nor do we pretend that the Vulgate itself was free from such, before the correction of 
SixtusV. and Clement VIII. which through the mistakes of printers, and, before print- 
ing, of transcribers, happened to several copies : So that a great many verbal differences, 
and lesser faults, were by learned men discovered in different copies :* (Not that any 
material corruption in points of faith were found in all copies ; for such God Almighty's 
providence, as protestants themselves confess, would never suffer to enter :) And in- 
deed these lesser depravations are not easily avoided, especially after several transcrip- 
tions of copies and impressions from the original, as we daily see in other books. 



* See a book entitled, Reason and Religion, cap. 8. where the Sixtine and Clementine 
BiSles are more fully treated of. 



8 



PHOTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 



To amend and rectify such, the church (as you may read in the preface to the Si&trftd 
edition) has used the greatest industry imaginable. Pope Pius IV. caused not only the 
original languages, but other copies to be carefully examined : Pius V. prosecuted that 
laborious work : and by Sixtus V. it was finished, who commanded it to be put to the 
press, as appears by his bull, which begins, Eternus ille coelestum, &c. anno 1585. Yet, 
notwithstanding the bull prefixed before his Bible (then printed) the same Pope Sixtus 
(as is seen in the preface made anno 1592) after diligent examination, found no few faults 
slipped into his impression by the negligence of the printers : And therefore Censuit at- 
que decrevit, both judged and decreed to have the whole work examined and reprinted ; 
but that second correction being prevented by his death, was (after the very short reign 
of three other popes) undertaken, and happily finished by his successor Clement VIII. 
answerable to the desire and absolute intention of his predecessor, Sixtus : Whence it is 
that the Vulgate now extant is called the correction of Sixtus, because this vigilant 
pope, notwithstanding the endeavours of his two predecessors, is said to have begun it, 
which was, according to his desire, recognized and perfected by Clement VIII. and 
therefore is not undeservedly called also the Clementine Bible : So that pope Sixtus's 
Bible, after Clement's recognition, is now read in the church, as authentic true Scrip- 
ture, and is the very best corrected copy in the latin Vulgate. 

And whereas pope Sixtus's bull enjoined that his Bible be read in all churches, with- 
out the least alteration ; yet this injunction supposed the interpreters and printers to 
have done exactly their duty every way, which was found wanting upon a second review 
of the whole work. Such commands and injunctions, therefore, where new difficulties 
arise (not thought of before) are not like definitions of faith, unalterable, but may and 
ought to be changed according to the legislator's prudence. What I say here is indispu- 
table ; for how could pope Sixtus, after a sight of such faults as caused him to intend an- 
other impression, enjoin no alteration, when he desired one, which his successor did for 
him : So that if pope Sixtus had lived longer, he would as well have changed the breve 
as amended his impression. 

And whereas there were sundry different lections of the Vulgar latin, before the said 
correction of Sixtus and Clement, the worthy doctors of Lovain, with an immense labour, 
placed in the margin of their Bible these different lections of Scripture ; not determin- 
ing which reading was best, or to be preferred before others ; as knowing well, that the 
decision of such causes belongs to the public judicature and authority of the church. 
Pope Clement, therefore, omitting no human diligence, compared lection with lection ; 
and after maturely weighing all, preferred that which was most agreeable to the ancient 
copies, a thing necessary to be done for the procuring one uniform lection of Scripture 
in the church, approved of by the see apostolic. And from this arises that villanous 
calumny and open slander of Dr. Stillingfleet ; who affirms, That the pope took where 
he pleased the marginal annotations in the Lovain Bible, and inserted them into the 
text : Whereas, (I say) he took not the annotations or commentaries of the Lovain doc- 
tors, but the different readings of Scripture found in several copies. 

Mr. James makes a great deal of noise with his impertinent comparisons between 
these two editions, and that of Lovain : Yet among all his differences he finds not one 
contrariety in any material point of faith or manners : and as for other differences, such 
as touch not faith and religion, arising from the expressions, being longer or shorter, less 
clear in the one, and more significant in the other ; or happening through the negligence 
of printers, they give him no manner of ground for his vain cavils ; especially seeing (I 
say) the Lovain Bible gave the different readings, without determining which was to be 
preferred ; and what faults were slipped into the Sixtine edition were by him observed, 
and a second correction designed, which in the Clementine edition was perfected, arid 
one uniform reading approved of. 

Against Thomas James's comparisons, read the learned James Gretser, who sufficient- 
ly discovers his untruths, with a Mentito tertio Thomas James decern milia verborum, 
&c. after which, judge whether he hits every thing he says; and whether the Vulgar 
Latin is to be corrected by the Lovain annotations, or these by the Vulgar, if any thing 
were amiss in either ? In fine, whether, if Mr. James's pretended differences arise from 
comparing all with the Hebrew, Greek, and Chaldee, must we needs suppose him to know 
the last energy and force of every Hebrew, Greek, or Chaldee word (when there is con- 
troversy) better than the authors of the Lovain, and correctors of the Vulgar Latin [the 
Sixtine-Clementine edition.] Again, let us demand of him, whether all his differences 
imply any material alteration in faith or manners, or introduce any notable error, contrary 
to God's revealed verities : Or are ratjier mere verbal differences, grounded on the ob- 
scure signification of original words. In fine, if he, or any for him, plead any material 
alteration, let them name any authentic copy, either original or translation ; by the in- 
disputable integrity whereof these supposed errors may be cancelled, and God's pure re- 



OF THE SCRIPTURES. 



vealed verities put in their* place. But to do this, after such immense labour and diligence 
used in the correction of the Vulgar, will prove a desperate impossibility.* 

Indeed Mr. James might have had just cause to exclaim if he had found in these 
Bibles such corruptions, as the Protestant apostle, Martin Luther, wilfully makes in his 
translations : As when he adds the word [alone] to the text, j to maintain his heresy of 
faith alone justifying; and omits that verse,± [But if you do not forgive, neither will your 
fether, which is in heaven, forgive your sins.] He also omits these words, § [That you 
abstain from fornication :] And because the word Trinity sounded coldly with him, he 
left out this sentence,|| which is the only text in. the Bible that can be brought to prove 
that great mystery, [There are three who bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, 
and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.] Or if Mr. James had found such gross 
corruptions, as that of Zuinglius, when instead of our blessed Saviour's positive words 
[This is my body] he translates, This is a sign of my body, to avoid the doctrine of the 
real presence, or such as are hereafter discovered in Protestant English translations ; If, 
I say, he had met with such wilful and abominable corruptions as these, he might have 
had good cause of complaint ; but seeing the most he can make of all his painful compa- 
risons comes but to this, viz. that he notes such faults as Sixtus himself observed, after 
the impression was finished, and as Clement rectified : I think he might have better 
employed his time in correcting the gross and most intolerable corruptions of the Pro- 
testant translation, than to have busied himself about so unnecessary a work : But there 
are a certain sort of men, that had rather employ themselves in discovering imaginary 
motes in their neighbour's eyes, than in clearing their own from real beams. 

To conclude this point, no man can be certainly assured of the true Scripture, unless 
he first come to a certainty of a true church, independently of Scripture. Find out, there- 
fore, the true church, and we know, by the authority of our undoubted testimony, the 
true Scripture ; for the infallible testimony of the church is absolutely necessary for as- 
suring us of an authentic Scripture. And this I cannot see how Protestants can deny, 
especially when they seriously consider, that in matters of religion, it must needs be an 
unreasonable thing to endeavour to oblige any man to be tried by the Scriptures of a 
false religion : For who can in prudence require of a Christian to stand in debates of re- 
ligion to the decisions of the Scripture of the Turks, " the Alcoran ?" Doubtless, there- 
fore, when men appeal to- Scripture for determining religious differences, their intention 
is to appeal to such Scriptures, and such alone ; and to all such as are admitted by the 
true church: And how can we know what Scriptures are admitted by the true church, 
unless we know which is the true church ?f 

So likewise, touching the exposition of Scripture, without doubt, when Protestants fly 
to Scriptures for their rule, whereby to square their religion, and to decide debates be- 
tween them and their adversaries, they appeal to Scriptures as rightly understood : For 
who would be tried by Scriptures understood in a wrong sense ? Now when contests 
arise between them and others of different judgments concerning the right meaning of 
it ; certainly they will not deny, but the judge to decide this debate must appertain to 
the true religion : For what Christian will apply himself to a Turk or Jew to decide 
matters belonging to Christianity ? Or who would go to an atheist to determine matters 
of religion ? 

In like manner, when they are forced to have recourse to the private spirit in reli- 
gious matters, doubtless they design not to appeal to the private spirit of an atheist, a 
Jew, or a heretic, but to the private spirit of such as are of the true religion : And is it 
possible for them to know certainly who are members of the true church ? Or what ap- 
pertains to the true religion, unless they be certainly informed " which is the true 
church ?" So that, I say, no man can be certainly assured which or what books, or how 
much is true Scripture ; or of the right sense and true meaning of Scripture, unless he 
first come to a certainty of the true church. And of this opinion was the great St. Au- 
gustine, when he declared, that " he would not believe the Gospel, if it was not that the 
authority of the Catholic church moved him to it :" Ego veto Evangelio non crederem, 
nisi me ecclesice Catholicce commoveret authoritas .* * 



* See the Preface to Sixtus V. edit. Antwerp, 1599. And Bib. Max. Sect. 19, 20. Se- 
rarius, c. 19. 

f Rom. 3. 28. % Mark 11. 26. § 1 Thes. 4. 3. || John 5. 7. 

1 We must of necessity know the true church before we be certain either which is 
true Scripture, or which is the true sense of Scripture ; or by what spirit it is to be. ex- 
pounded. And whether that church, which has continued visible in the world from 
Christ's time till this day, or that which was never known or heard of in the world till 
1500 years after our Saviour, is the true chnrch, let the world judge. 

** St. Aug. lib, contr .Epist. Manich. cap. 5. 

2 



i 



OF BOOKS REJEUTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. 



OF THE CANONICAL BOOKS OF SCRIPTURE. 

The Catholic church " setting- this always before her eyes, that, errors being 1 removed, 
the very purity of the Gospel may be preserved in the church ; which being 1 promised 
before by the prophets, in the holy Scriptures, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, 
first published with his own mouth, and afterwards commanded to be preached to every 
creature, by the apostles, as the fountain of all the wholesome truth, and moral disci- 
pline contained in the written books, and in the traditions not written, &c. following- the 
example of the orthodox fathers, and affected with similar piety and reverence ; doth 
receive and honour all the books both of the Old and New Testament, seeing one God 
is the author of both,"* &c. These are the words of the sacred council of Trent ; 
■which further ordained, that the table, or catalogue, of the canonical books should be 
joined to this decree, lest doubt might arise to any, which books they are that are re- 
ceived by the council. They are these following-, viz. 



OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 

Five books of Moses ; that is, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. 
Joshua, Judges, Ruth. 
Four of the Kings. 
Two of Paralipomenon. 

The first and second of Esdras, which is called Nehemias. 

Tobias, Judith, Hester, Job, David's Psalter of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, 
Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Esaias, Hieremias, with Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel. 

Twelve lesser prophets; that is, Osea, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Miclueas, Nahum, 
Abacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Malachias. 

The first and second of the Maccabees. 



OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 

Foitii Gospels, according to St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John. 
The Acts of the Aposiles, written by St. Luke the Evangelst. 

Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul ; viz. to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the 
Gfllatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, to the Colossians, to the Tliessalo- 
nians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews. 

Two of St. Peter the Apostle. 

Three of St. John the Apostle. 

One of St. James the Apostle. 

One of St. Jude the Apostle. 

And the Apocalypse of St. John the Apostle. 

To which catalogue of sacred books is adjoined this decree : 

But if any man shall not receive for sacred and canonical these whole books, with all 
their parts, as they are accustomed to be read in the Catholic church, and as they are 
in the old Vulgar Latin edition, &c. be he anathema. 

The third council of Carthage,f after having decreed, That nothing should be read in 
the church under the name of Divine Scriptures, but canonical Scriptures, says, That 
the canonical Scriptures are, Genesis, Exodus, &c. so reckoning up all the very same 
books, and making particularly the same catalogue of them, with this recited out of the 
Council of Trent. St. Augustin, who was present at, and subscribed to this council, also 
numbers the same books as above ; Vid. Doctr. Christian. Lib. II. cap. 8. 

Notwithstanding which, several of the said books are by the Protestants rejected as 
Apocryphal ; their reasons are, because they are not in the Jews canon, nor were ac- 
cepted for canonical in the primitive church ; reasons by which they might reject a great 
many more, if it pleased them : but indeed the chief cause is, that some things in these 
books are so manifestly against their opinions, that they have no other answer but to 



* Concil. Trident. Sess. 4. Decret. de Canonicis Scripturis. Mark. c. ult* 
f 3 Concil. Carthag. Can. 4f, 



OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. 



11 



reject their authority ; as appears very plainly from these words of Mr. Whitaker's :* 
We pass not, says he, for that Raphael mentioned in Tobit, neither acknowledge we 
these seven angels whereof he makes mention ; all that differs much from canonical 
Scripture, which is reported of that Raphael, and savours of I know not what supersti- 
tion. Neither will I believe freewill, although the book of Ecclesiasticus confirm it a 
hundred times. This denying of books to be canonical, because the Jews received 
them not, was also an old heretical shift, noted and refuted by St. Augustin,f touching 
the Book of Wisdom; which - some in his time refused, because it convinced their 
errors : but must it pass for a sufficient reason amongst Christians to deny such books, 
because they are not in the canon of the Jews? Who sees not that the canon of the 
church of Christ is of more authority with true Christians, than that of the Jews ? For 
a canon is an assured rule and warrant of direction ; whereby, says St. Augustin, the 
infirmity of our defect in knowledge is guided, and by which rule other books are 
known to be God's word : his reason is,+ Because we have no other assurance that the 
Books of Moses, the four gospels, and other books, are the true word of God, but by 
the canon of the church. Whereupon the same great doctor uttered that famous say- 
ing, I would not believe the gospel, except the authority of the Catholic church moved 
me thereunto. 

And that these books which Protestants reject, are by the church numbered in the 
sacred canon, may be seen above : However, to speak of them, in particular, in their 
order. 



THE BOOK OF TOBTAS 

Is by St. Cyprian, de Oratione Dominica, alleged as divine Scripture, to prove that 
prayer is good with fasting and alms. St. Ambrose^ calls this book by the common 
name of Scripture ; saying, He will briefly gather the virtues of Tobias, which the 
Scripture in historical manner lays forth at large : calling also this history Prophetical, 
and Tobias a prophet : and in another placej alleges this book as he does other holy 
Scriptures, to prove that the virtues of God's servants far excel the moral philosophers. 
St. Augustin t made a special sermon of Tobias, as he did of Job. St. Chrysostome** 
alleges it as Scripture, denouncing a curse to the contemners of it. St. Gregoryff also 
alleges it as holy Scripture. St. Bede expounds this whole book mystically, as he 
does other holy Scriptures. St. Hierom translated it out of the Chaldee language, 
judging it more meet to displease the pharisaical Jews who reject it, than not to satisfy 
the will of holy bishops, urging to have it. Ep. ad Chromat. Heliodornm. To. 3. In 
fine, St. Augustin tells us the cause of its being written in these words, — The servant of 
God, holy Tobias, is given to us after the law, for an example, that we might know how 
to practise the things which we read. And if temptations come upon us, not to depart 
from the fear of God, nor expect help from any other than from him. 



OF THE BOOK OF JUDITH. 

This book was by Origen, Tertullian, and other fathers, whom St. Hilary cites, held 
for canonical, before the first general council of Nice yet St. Hierom supposed it not 
so, till such time as he found that the said sacred council reckoned it in the number of 
canonical Scriptures ; after which he so esteemed it, that Jie not only translated it out 
of the Chaldee tongue, wherein it was first written, but also, as occasion required, cited 
the same as Divine Scripture, and sufficient to convince matters of faith in controversy, 
numbering it with other Scriptures, whereof none doubts, saying, Ruth, Hester, Judith, 
were of so great renown, that they gave names to sacred volumes. St. Ambrose, 
St. Augustin, St. Chrysostome, and many other holy fathers, account it for canonical 
Scripture. 



* Whit. Contra Camp. p. 17. 

| S. Aug. lib. de Prxdest. Sanct. c. 14. 

+ S. Aug. lib. 11. c. 5. contra Faustum, &. lib. 2. c. 32. contra Cresconium, 

§ S. Amb. lib. de Tobia. c. 1. 

|j Lib. 3. Offic. c. 14. 

1 S. Aug. Serm. 225. de Tern. 

** S. Chrysost. Horn. 15. ad Heb. 

ff S. Greg. part. 3. Pastor, curae admon. 21. 

±± Sec the Argument in the Book of Judith in the Doway Bible, Tom, L 



OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL- 



PART OF THE BOOK OF HESTER. 

By the councils of Laodicea and Carthage, this book was declared canonical ;* and bv 
most of the ancient fathers esteemed as divine Scripture ; only two or three before the 
said councils, doubted of its authority. And though St. Hierom, in his time, found not 
certain parts thereof in the Hebrew, yet in the Greek he found all the sixteen chapters 
contained in ten : and it is not improbable that these parcels were sometimes in the 
Hebrew, as divers whole books which are now lost. But whether they ever were so or 
not, the church of Christ accounts the whole book of infallible authority, reading as well 
these parts as the rest in her public office. 



OF THE BOOKS OF WISDOM. 

It is granted, that several of the ancient fathers would not urge these books of Wis-- 
dom, and others, in their writings against the Jews, not that themselves doubted of their 
authority, but because they knew that they would be rejected by the Jews as not 
canonical : and so St. Hierom, in respect of the Jews, said these books were not canoni- 
cal ; nevertheless, he often alleged testimonies out of them, as of other divine Scrip- 
tures ; sometimes with this parenthesis (si cui tamen placet librum recipere) in cap. 8. 
and 12. Zacharix : but in his latter writings absolutely without any such restriction, as 
in cap. 1. and 56. Isai<e, and in 18. Jeremiae ; where he professes to allege none but 
canonical Scripturcf As for the other ancient fathers, namely, St. Irenxus, St. Clement 
of Alexandria, Origen, St. Athanasius, St. Basil, St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Gregory 
Nyssen, St. Epiphanius, St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, 8cc. they 
make no doubt at all of their being canonical Scripture, as appears by their express 
terms, " Divine Scripture, Divine Word, Sacred Letters, Prophetical Saying, the Holy 
Ghost saith, and the like." And St. Augustine affirms, that, " The sentence of the 
books of Wisdom ought not to be rejected by certain, inclining to pelagianism, which 
has so long been publicly read in the church of Christ, and received by all Christians, 
bishops, and others, even to the last of the laity, penitents, and catechumens, cum vene- 
ratione divinae authoritatis," with veneration of divine authority ? Which also the excel- 
lent writers, next to the apostle's times, alleging for witness, nihil se adhibere nisi divi- 
num testimonium crediderunt, thought that they alleged nothing but divine testimony 



OF ECCLESIASTICUS. 

What has been said of the foregoing book, may be said also of this. The holy fathers 
above named, and several others, as St. Cyprian, de opere & eleemosyna, St. Gregory 
the Great, in Psal. 50. It is also reckoned for canonical by the third council of Carthage, 
and by St. Augustine, in lib. 2. c. 8. Doct. Christian. & lib. 17. c. 20. Civit. Dei. 



OF BARUCH, WITH THE EPISTLE OF JEREMY. 

Mast of the ancient fathers supposed this prophecy to be Jeremiah's, though none of 
them doubted but Baruch his scribe was the writer of it; not but that the Holy Ghost 
directed him in it : and, therefore, by the fathers and councils, it has ever been accepted 
as divine Scripture. The council of Laodicea, in the last canon, expressly names Ba- 
ruch, Lamentations, and Jeremiah's Epistle. § St. Hierom testifies, that he found it in 
the Vulgate Latin edition, and that it contains many things of Christ, and the latter 
times ; though because he found it not in the Hebrew, nor in the Jewish canon, he urges 
it not against them.|| It is by the councils of Florence and Trent expressly defined to 
be canonical Scripture. 



* Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 1. 

f Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 2. And Jodoc. Coce. Tom. 1. Thesau. li. 6. Art. 9. 

* S. Aug. in lib. de Prcedestinat. Sanct. cap. 14. Et lib. de Civit. Dei. 17. c. 20, 
§ See the Argument of Baruch's Prophecy in the Doway Bible, Tom. 2- 

11 St. Hierom. in Pnefat. Jeremise. 



OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL, 



13 



OF THE SONG OF THE THREE CHILDREN, THE IDOL, BELL AND 
DRAGON, WITH THE STORY OF SUSANNA. 

It is no just exception against these, and other parts of holy Scripture of the Old Tes» 
lament, to say, they are not in the Hebrew edition, being otherwise accepted for cano- 
nical by the Catholic church : and further, it is very probable that these parcels were 
sometime either in the Hebrew or Chaldee ; in which two languages, part in one, and 
part in the other, the rest of the book of Daniel was written ; for from whence could 
the Septuagint, Theodotion, Symmachus, and Aquila translate them ? In whose editions 
St. Hierom found them. But if it be objected, that St. Hierom calls them fables, and 
so did not account them canonical Scripture ; we answer, that he, reporting the Jewish 
opinion, uses their terms, not explaining his own judgment, intending to deliver sin- 
cerely what he found in the Hebrew : yet would he not omit to insert the rest, adver- 
tising withal, that he had it in Theodotion's translation ; which answer is clearly justified 
by his own testimony, in these words : " Whereas I relate," says he, "what the Hebrews 
say against the Hymn of the Three Children ; he that for this reputes me a fool, proves 
himself a sycophant ; for I did not write what myself judged, but what they are accus- 
tomed to say against me."* 

The prayer of Azarias is alleged as divine Scripture by St. Cyprian, St. Ephrem, St. 
Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius, and others.-j- The Hymn of the Three Children 
is alleged for divine Scripture by divers holy fathers, as also by St. Hierom himself, in 
cap. 3. ad Gallatos 8c Epist. 49. de Muliere Septies icta; also, by St. Ambrose, and the 
council of Toledo, c. 13. 

So likewise the history of Susanna is cited for holy Scripture by St. Ignatius, TertuL 
lian, St. Cyprian, St. Chrysostom, who in Horn. 7. fine, has a whole sermon on Susanna,, 
as upon holy Scripture : St. Ambrose and St. Augustine cite the same also as canonical. 

The history of Bell and the Dragon is judged to be divine Scripture ; St. Cyprian, St* 
Basil, and St. Athanasius, in Synopsi, briefly explicating the argument of the book of 
Daniel, make express mention of the Hymn of the Three Children, of the history of 
Susanna, and of Bell and the Dragon. 



OF THE TWO BOOKS OF MACCABEES. 

Ever since the third council of Carthage, these two books of the Maccabees have 
been held for sacred and canonical by the Catholic church, as is proved by a council of 
seventy bishops, under pope Gelasius ; and by the sixth general council, in approving 
the third of Carthage ; as also by the councils of Florence and Trent. 

But because some of the church of England divines would seem to make their people 
believe, that the Maccabees were not received as canonical Scripture in Gregory the 
Great's time, consequently not before,^ I will, besides these councils, refer you to the 
holy fathers, who lived before St. Gregory's days, and alleged these two books of the 
Maccabees as divine Scripture : namely, St. Clement Alexandrinus, lib. 1. Stromat. St. 
Cyprian, lib. 1. Epistolarum Ep. 3. ad Cornelium, lib. 4. Ep. 1. & de Exhort, ad Marty- 
rium, c. 11. St. Isidorus, lib. 16. c. 1. St. Gregory Nazianzen has also a whole oration 
concerning the seven Maccabee martyrs, and their mother. St. Ambrose, lib. 1. c. 41. 
Office. See in St. Hierom's Commentaries upon Daniel, c. 1. 11, and 12. in how great 
esteem he had these books ; though, because he knew they were not in the Jewish 
canon, he would not urge them against the Jews. And the great doctor, St. Augustine, 
in lib. 2. c. 8. de Doctrina Christiana, & lib. 18. c. 36. de Civit. Dei, most clearly 
avouches, that, " Notwithstanding the Jews deny these books, the church holds them 
canonical." And whereas, one Gaudentius, a heretic, alleged, for defense of his heresy, 
the example of Razias, who slew himself, 2 Mac. 14. St. Augustine denies not the 
authority of the book, but discusses the fact, and admonishes, that it is not unprofitably 
received by the church, " If it be read or heard soberly," which was a necessary admo- 
nition to those donatists, who, not understanding the holy Scriptures, depraved them, as 
St. Peter says of like heretics, to their own perdition. Which testimonies, I think, may 
be sufficient to satisfy any one who is not pertinacious and obstinate, that these two 



* S. Hier. lib. 2. c. 9. advers. Ruffinum. 
t Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 2. 

i See the Second Vindication of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church pf> 
England, 



1 I 



OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL, 



books of the Maccabees, as well as others in the New Testament, were received, and 
held for canonical Scripture, long- before St. Gregory the Great's time. 

Judge now, good reader, whether the author of the Second Vindication, Sec. has not 
imposed upon the world in this point of the books of the Maccabees. And, indeed, if 
this were all the cheat he endeavours to put upon us, it were well, but he goes yet fur- 
ther, and names eleven points of doctrine besides this, which he, with his fellows, quoted 
in his margin, falsely affirms not to have been taught in England by St. Augustine, the 
Benedictine monk, when he converted our nation ; telling us, " That the mystery of 
iniquity," as he blasphemously terms the doctrine of Christ's holy church, " was not 
then come to perfection." For first, says he, "The Scripture was yet received as a 
perfect rule of faith." Secondly, "The books of the Maccabees, which you now put in 
your canon, were rejected then as apocryphal." Thirdly, " That good works were not 
yet esteemed meritorious." Fourthly, " Nor auricular confession a sacrament." Fifthly, 
'* That solitary masses were disallowed by him." And sixthly, " Transubstantiation yet 
unborn." Seventhly, " That the sacrament of the eucharist was hitherto administered 
in both kinds." What then? so it was also in one kind. Eighthly, "Purgatory itself 
not brought either to certainty or to perfection." Ninthly, " That by consequence 
masses for the dead were not intended to deliver souls from these torments." Tenthly, 
"Nor images allowed for any other purpose than for ornament and instruction. Elev- 
enthly, " That the sacrament of extreme unction was yet unformed." Then you must, 
with your master Luther, count St. James's epistle, an epistle of straw. Twelfthly, 
" And even the pope's supremacy was so far from being then established as it now is, 
that pope Gregory thought it to be the forerunner of anti-christ for one bishop to set 
himself above all the rest." 

I will only, in particular, take notice here of this last of his false instances, because he 
cites and misapplies the words of St, Gregory the Great, to the deluding of his reader : 
whereas St. Gregory did not think it anti-christian or unlawful for the pope, whom (not 
himself, but) our Saviour Christ had set and appointed, in the person of St. Peter, 
above all the rest, to exercise spiritual supremacy and jurisdiction over all the bishops 
in the Christian world: but he thought it anti-christian for any bishop to set up himself, 
as John bishop of Constantinople had done, by the name or title of universal bishop, so 
as if he alone were the sole bishop, and no bishop but he, in the universe ; and in this 
sense St. Gregory thought this name or title not only worthily forborne by his prede- 
cessors, and by himself, but terms it prophane, sacrilegious, and anti-christian ; and in 
this sense the bishops of Rome have always utterly renounced the title of universal 
bishop ; on the contrary, terming themselves servi servorum Dei. And this is proved 
from the words of Andraeus Friccius, a Protestant, whom Peter Martyr terms an excel- 
lent and learned man. "Some there are," says he, "that object to the authority of 
Gregory, who says, that such a title pertains to the precursor of anti-christ ; but the rea- 
son of Gregory is to be known, and may be gathered from his words, which he repeats 
in many epistles, that the title of universal bishop is contrary to, and doth gainsay the 
grace which is commonly poured upon all bishops; he therefore, who calls himself the 
only bishop, takes the episcopal power from the rest: wherefore this title he would 
have rejected, &c. But it is nevertheless evident by other places, that Gregory thought 
that the charge and principality of the whole church was committed to Peter, 8cc. And 
yet for this cause Gregory thought not that Peter was the forerunner of anti-christ."* 
Thus evidently and clearly this Protestant writer explains this difficulty. 

To this may be added the testimonies of other Protestants, who, from the writings of 
St. Gregory, clearly prove the bishop of Rome to have had and exercised a power and 
jurisdiction, not only over the Greek, but over the universal church. The Magdebur- 
gian centurists show us, that the Roman see appoints her watch over the whole world ; 
that the apostolic see is head of all churches; that even Constantinople is subject to 
the apostolic see.f These centurists charge moreover the bishop of Rome, in the very 
example and person of pope Gregory, and by collection out of his writings, by them par- 
ticularly alleged, " That he challenged to himself power to command all archbishops, to 
ordain and depose bishops at his pleasure." And, " That he claimed a right to cite 
archbishops to declare their cause before him, when they were accused." And also, 
" To excommunicate and depose them, giving commission to their neighbour bishops to 
proceed against them." That " In their provinces he placed his legates to know and 
end the causes of such as appealed to the see of Rome."* With much more, touching 
the exercise of his supremacy. To which doctor Saunders adds yet more out of St. 
Gregory's own works, and in his own words, as, " That the see apostolic, by the autho- 



* Andrseas Friccius de ecclesia, 1. 2. c. 10. page 579, 
f Centur. 6 Col. 425, 426, 427 ; 428, 429, 438, 



t Vid. priced. Notas. 



OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL, 15 

rity of God, is preferred before all churches. That all bishops, if any fault be found in 
them, are subject to the see apostolic. That she is the head of faith, and of all the 
faithful members. That the see apostolic is the head of all churches. That the Roman 
church, by the words which Christ spake to Peter, was made the head of all churches. 
That no scruple or doubt ought to be made of the faith of the see apostolic. That all 
those things are false, which are taught contrary to the doctrine of the Roman church, 
That to return from schism to the Catholic church, is to return to the communion of the 
bishops of Rome. That he who will not have St. Peter, to whom the keys of heaven 
were committed, to shut him out from the entrance of life, must not in this world be 
separated from his see. That they are perverse men, who refuse to obey the see apos^ 
tolic."* 

Considering all these words of pope Gregory, does not this vindicator of the church of 
England's doctrine show himself a grand impostor, to offer to the abused judgment of 
his unlearned readers, an objection so frivolous and misapplied, by the advantage only 
of a naked, sounding resemblance of mistaken words ? To conclude, therefore, in the 
words of doctor Saunders : " He who reads all these particulars, and more of the same 
kind that are to be found in the works of St. Gregory, and yet with a brazen forehead, 
fears not to interpret that which he wrote against the name of universal bishop, as if he 
could not abide that any one bishop should have the chief seat, and supreme govern- 
ment of the whole militant church ; that man, says he, seems to me either to have cast 
off all understanding and sense of a man, or else to have put on the obstinate perverse - 
ness of the devil."f 

It is not my business in this place, to digress into particular replies against his other 
false instances* of the difference between the doctrine of pope Gregory the Great, and 
that of the council of Trent : I will therefore, in general, oppose the words of a protest- 
ant bishop, against this protestant ministerial guide, and so submit them to the consider^ 
ation of the judicious reader. 

John Bale, a protestant bishop, affirms,§ that " The religion preached by St. Augus- 
tine to the Saxons was, altars, vestments, images, chalices, crosses, censers, holy vessels, 
holy waters, the sprinkling thereof, reliques, translation of reliques, dedicating of 
churches to the bones and ashes of saints, consecration of altars, chalices and corporals, 
consecration of the font of baptism, chrysm and oil, celebration of mass, the archiepis- 
copal pall at solemn mass time, Romish mass books ; also free will, merit, justification of 
works, penance, satisfaction, purgatory, the unmarried life of priests, the public invoca- 
tion of saints and their worship, the worship of images."! In another place he says, 
that "Pope Leo the first decreed, that men should worship the images of the dead, and 
allowed the sacrifice of the mass, exorcism, pardons, vows, monachism, transubstantia- 
tion, prayer for the dead, offering of the healthful host of Christ's body and blood for 
the dead, the Roman bishop's claim and exercise of jurisdiction and supremacy over all 
churches, reliquium pontijicice superstitionis chaos, even the whole chaos of popish super- 
stitions." He tells us, that "Pope Innocent, who lived long before St. Gregory's time, 
made the anointing of the sick to be a sacrament."f 

These are bishop Bale's words ; which this vindicator would do well to reconcile with 
his own. The like may be found in other protestants; namely, in doctor Humfrey in 
Josuitismi, part II. The centurists, &c. 

But now to return to the place where we occasionally entered into this digression , 
you see by what authority and testimonies both of councils and fathers we have proved 
these books, which protestants reject, to be canonical: yet, if a thousand times more 
were said, it would be all the same with the perverse innovators of our age, who are 
resolved to be obstinate, and, after their bold and licentious manner, to receive or reject 
what they please ; still following the steps of their first masters, who tore out of the 
Bible, some one book, some another, as they found them contrary to their erroneous 
and heretical opinions. For example : 

Whereas Moses was the first that ever wrote any part of the Scripture, and he who 
wrote the law of God, the ten commandments ; yet Luther thus rejects both him and 
his ten commandments:** "We will neither hear nor see Moses, for he was given only 
to the Jews ; neither does he belong in any thing to us." — " I," says he, " will not re- 
ceiveff Moses with his law; for he is the enemy of Christ."^ " Moses is the master of 



* Dr. Saund. Visit. Monar. lib. 7. a N. 433. 541. f Dr. Saunders supra. 

i You will find some of them hinted at in other places as occasion offers. 
§ Bale in act. Rom. pontif. edit. Basil. 1658. p. 44, 45, 46, 47. & cent. I, Col. 3, 
!! Pageant of popes, fol. 27. f lb. fol. 26. 

** Tom. 3. Germ. fol. 40, 41. & in Colloq. Mensal. Ger. fol, 152, 153. 
tf In Coloc. Mensal, c. de Lege 8c Evan, 
Ibid. fol. 118. 



OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. 



all hangmen."* "The ten commandments belong not to Christians." "Let the ten 
commandments be altogether rejected, and all heresy will presently cease ; for the ten 
commandments are, as it were, the fountain from whence all heresies spring."f 

Islebius, Luther's scholar, taught,+ that " the decalogue was not to be taught in the 
church :" and from him came§ the sect of antinomians, who publicly taught, that " The 
law of God is not worthy to be called the word of God : if thou art an whore, if an whore- 
monger, if an adulterer, or otherwise a sinner, believe, and thou walkest in the way of 
salvation. When thou art drowned in sin even to the bottom, if thou believest, thou 
art in the midst of happiness. All that busy themselves about Moses, that is, the ten 
commandments, belong to the devil, to the gallows with Moses. "|j 

Martin Luther believes not all things to be so done, as they are related in the book of 
Job : with him it is, " as it were, the argument of afable."^ 

Castalio commanded the Canticles of Solomon to be thrust out of the canon, as an im- 
pure and obscene song ; reviling, with bitter reproaches, such ministers as resisted him 
therein.** 

Pomeran, a great evangelist among the Lutherans, writes thus touching St. James's 
epistles : " He concludes ridiculously, he cites Scripture against Scripture, which thing 
the Holy Ghost cannot abide ; wherefore that epistle may not be numbered among other 
books, which set forth the justice of faith."-}-j- 

Vitus Theodorus, a protestant preacher of Norimberg, writes thus : " The Epistle of 
James, and Apocalypse of John, we have of set purpose left out, because the Epistle of 
James is not only in certain places reprovable, where he too much advances works 
against faith ; but also his doctrine throughout is patched together with divers pieces, 
whereof no one agrees with another."^ 

The Magdeburgian centurists say, that " the Epistle of James much swerves from the 
analogy of the apostolical doctrine, whereas it ascribes justification not only to faith, but 
to works, and calls the law, a law of liberty."§§ 

John Calvin doubted whether the Apostles' Creed was made by the apos'tles. He 
argued St. Matthew of error. He rejected these words : " Many are called, but few 
chosen."|||| 

Clebitius, an eminent protestant, opposes the evangelists one against another : " Mat- 
thew and Mark," says he, " deliver the contrary ; therefore to Matthew and Mark, be- 
ing two witnesses, more credit is to be given than to one Luke,"f ^ &c. 

Zuinglius and other protestants affirm, that " all things in St. Paul's epistles are not 
sacred ; and that in sundry things' he erred."*** 

Mr. Rogers, the great labourer to our English convocation men, names several of his 
protestant brethren, who rejected for apocryphal the Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews, of 
St. James, the first and second of John, of Jude, and the Apocalypse. "fff 

Thus, you see, these pretended reformers have torn out, some one piece or book of 
sacred Scripture, some another; with such a licentious freedom, rejecting, deriding, 
discarding, and censuring them, that their impiety can never be paralleled but by pro- 
fessed atheists. Yet all these sacred books were, as is said, received for canonical in the 
third council of Carthage, above thirteen hundred years ago. 

But, with the church of England, it matters not by what authority books are judged 
canonical, if the Holy Spirit, in the hearts of her children, testify them to be from God. 
They telling us, by Mr. Rogers, that they judge such and such books canonical, " not 
so much because learned and godly men in the church so have, and do receive and 
allow them, as for that the Holy Spirit in our hearts doth testify, that they are from 
God." By instinct of which private Spirit in their hearts, they decreed as many as they 
thought good for canonical, and rejected the rest ; as yog. may see in the sixth of the 
thirty-nine articles.}^ 



* Serm. de Mose. • f In Convival. Colloq. cited by Auri. faber, cap. de Lege. 

* See Osiander ; Cent. 16. p. 311, 312, 320. § Sleidan Hist. 1. 12. fol. 162. 
II Vid. Confessio. Manstieldensium Ministrorum Tit. de Antinomis, fol. 89, 90. 

f In Serm. Convival. Tit. de Patriarch et Prophet, et Tit. de libris Vet. etNov. Test. 

** Vid. Beza in Vita Calvini. ft Pomeran. ad. Rom. c. 8. 

n In Annot. in Nov. Test. pag. ult. §§ Cent. 1. 1. 2. c. 4. Col. 54. 

Inst. 1. 2. c. 26. In Matth. 27. Harm, in Matt. 20. 16. 
TfK Victoria veritatis et ruina Papatus, Arg. 5. 

*** Tom. 2. Elench. f. 10. Magdeburg. Cent. 1. 1. 2. c. 10. Col. 580. 
fff Defence of the 39 Articles, Art. 6. 

*** The private Spirit, not the church, told those protestants who made the 39 arti- 
cles, what books of Scripture they were to hold for canonical. 



OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA. 



17 



OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA. 

The church of England has decreed,* that " such are to be understood canonical 
books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority there was never any doubt in 
the church and, therefore, by this rule she rejects these for apocryphal, viz. 

Tobit. Baruch, with the Epistle of Jere- Maccabees I. 

Judith. miah. Maccabees II. 

The rest of Esther. The Song of the Three Children. Manasseth, Prayer of. 

Wisdom. The Idol, Bell and the Dragon. Esdras III. 

Ecclesiasticus. The Story of Susanna. Esdras IV.f 

But if none pass for canonical, but such as were never doubted of in the church, I 
would know why the church of England admits of such books of the New Testament as 
have formerly been doubted of? " Some ancient writers doubted of the last chapter of 
St. Mark's Gospel:^ others of some part of the 22d of St. Luke :^ some of the begin- 
ning of the 8th of St. John: || others of the Epistle to the Hebrews :1 and others of the 
Epistles of St. James, Jude, the second of Peter, the second and third of John, and the 
Apocalypse."** 

And Doctor Bilson, a protestant, affirms, that " the Scriptures were not fully received 
in all places, no, not in Eusebius's time." He says, " the Epistles of James, Jude, the 
second of Peter, the second and third of John, are contradicted, as not written by the 
apostles. The Epistle to the Hebrews was for a while contradicted,'' &c. The churches 
of Syria did not receive the Second Epistle of Peter, nor the second and third of John, 
nor the Epistle of Jude, nor the Apocalypse. The like might be said for the churches 
of Arabia : " Will you hence conclude," says this doctor, " that these parts of Scripture 
were not apostolic, or that we need not to receive them now, because they were for- 
merly doubted of?" Thus Doctor Bilson. j-f 

And Mr. Rogers confesses, that " although some of the ancient fathers and doctors 
accepted not all the books contained in the New Testament for canonical ; yet in the 
end, they were wholly taken and received by the common consent of the church of 
Christ, in this world, for the very word of God,"^ &c. 

And, by Mr. Rogers's and the church of England's leave, so were also those books 
which they call apocrypha. For though they were, as we do not deny, doubted of by 
some of the ancient fathers, and not accepted for canonical ; " yet in the end," to use 
Mr. Rogers's words, "they were wholly taken and received by the common consent of 
the church of Christ, in this world, for the word of God."§§ Vide third council of Car- 
thage, which decrees, " that nothing should be read in the church, under the name of 
divine Scriptures, besides canonical Scriptures :" and defining which are canonical, 
reckons those which the church of England rejects as apocryphal. To this council St. 
Augustine subscribed, who,|||[ with St. Innocent,H Gelasius, and other ancient writers, 
number the said books in the canon of the Scripture. And protestants themselves con- 
fess, they were received in the number of canonical Scriptures.*** 

Brentius, a protestant, says, " there are some of the ancient fathers, who receive thes# 
apocryphal books into the number of canonical Scriptures ; and also some councils com- 
mand them to be acknowledged as canonical."ff f 

Doctor Covel also affirms of all these books, that, " if Ruffinus be not deceived, they 
were approved of, as parts of the Old Testament, by the apostles/'^t 

So that what Christ's church receives as canonical, we are not to doubt of : Doctor 
Fulk avouches, that " the church of Christ has judgment to discern true writing from 
counterfeit, and the word of God from the writings of men ; and this judgment she has 
of the Holy Ghost. §§§ And Jewel says, " the church of God has the spirit of wisdom 
to discern true Scripture from false."|||||| 

To conclude, therefore, in the words of the council of Trent : " If any man shall not 
receive for sacred and canonical these whole books, with all their parts, as they are read 
in the catholic church, and as they are in the Vulgate Latin edition, let him be ac- 
cursed."1H 

* In the 6th of the 39 Articles, f The three last are not numbered in the canon of the 
Scripture. * See St. Hierom Epist. ad Hed. q. 3. § St. Hilar. 1. 10. de Trin. et 
Hierom. 1. 2. contr. Pelagian. || Euseb. H. 1. 3. c. 39. 1 1d. 1. 3.c. 3. ** Et c. 
25, 28. Hierom divinis Must, in P. Jac. Jud. Pet. et Joan, et Ep. ad Dardan. ff Sur» 
vey of Christ. Suff. p. 664. Vid. 1st and 4th days Confer, in the Tower, anno 1581. 

4* Def. of the 39 Articles, p. 31, Art. 6. Third council of Carthage, Can. 47. 

Illl De Doct. Christian. 1. 2. c. 8. 11 Epist. ad. Exuper. c. 7. *** Tom. 1. Cone. 
Decret. cum 70 Episcop. fff Brentius Apol. Conf. Wit. Bucers scripta Ang. p. 713. 

tti Covel cont. Burg. p. 76, 77, et78. §§§ Fulk An. to a Couh'tr. Cathol. p. 5. 

nil Jewel Def. of the Apol. p, 201. 111 Concil. Trid. Sess. 4. Deer, de Can. Scrip, 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST THE CHURCH. 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



Et ego dico tibi, 
quia tu es Petrus, 
et super hanc Pe- 
tram cedificabo ec- 
clesiam tneam, (jix 
riiv tx.Khno'i'J.v .(&) 



Quod si non au- 
dierit eos, die ec- 
clesix iKKA»<rU 
si autem eccle- 
siam £xx\»{ri'stf 
non audierit, sit 
tibi sicut Etlinicus 
et Publicanus. 



Viri diligite ux- 
es vestras, sicut 
et Christus dilexit 
ecclesiam. 

Ut exhiberet ipsi 
sibi gloiiosam ec- 
clesiam. 

Sacramentum 
hoc est magnum ; 
ego autem dico in 
Christo et eccle- 

Sia tKKKHO-Uv. 



Et ecclesiam pvi 
mitivorwn ijtKXwi'j. 



The true English 
according to the 
Khemish trans- 
lation. 



Una est Cohan- 
ba mea. prux /ut*. 



Et ipsum dedit 
caput supra om- 
nem ecclesiam qua 
est corpus ipsius, 
et plenitudo ejus, 
qtd omnia in omni- 
bus adimpletur <r* 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



And I say to 
thee, that thou art 
Peter, and upon 
this rock will I 
build my 'church.' 



And if he will 
not hear them, tell 
the " church 
and if he will not 
hear the "church," 
let him be as a 
heathen, and as a 
publican. 



Husbands love 
your wives, as 
Christ loved the 
" church," v. 25. 

That he might 
present to him- 
self a glorious 
« church," v. 27. 

For this is a great 
i* sacrament ;" but 
I speak in Christ, 
and in the 
" church," v. 32, 
&c. 



And the 
"church" of the 
First-born. 



My dove is 
one." 



And hath made 
him head over all 
the " church," 
which is his body, 
the fulness of him 
" which is filled," 
all in all. 



The last transla- 
tion of the pro- 
testant Bible, 
Edit. London, 
anno 1683. 



Instead of 
church, they trans- 
late " congrega- 
tion." — Upon this 
rock will I build 
my " congrega- 
tion."^) 



If he will not 
hear them, tell the 
" congregation ;" 
and if he will not 
hear the *' congre- 
tion," Sec. 



Husbands love 
your wives, as 
Christ loved the 
" congregation." 

That he might 
present to himself 
a glorious " con- 
gregation." 

For this is a 
great " secret," 
for I speak in 
Christ, and in the 

congregation." 



And the " con- 
gregation" of the 
First-born. 



Mv dove is 
alone."(6) 



And gave him 
to be the head 
over all things to 
the " congrega 
tion," which is his 
body, the fulness 
of him " that fill 
eth" all in all.(c) 



It is corrected 
in this last trans - 
lation. 



Corrected* 



Corrected. 



Corrected, 



Corrected. 



Corrected. 



My dove 
but one." 



And gave him 
to be the head 
over all things 
to the "church, 
which is his bo- 
dy, the fulness 
of him "that fill- 
eth" all in alL 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST THE CHURCH. 



19 



The two English Bibles,* usually read in the Protestant congregations, at their first 
rising up, left out the word Catholic in the title of those epistles, which have been 
known by the name of Catholicse Epistolze, ever since the apostle's time :f and their lat- 
ter translations, dealing somewhat more honestly, have turned the word Catholic into 
" general," saying, " the general Epistle of James, of Peter," &c. As if we should 
say in. our creed, " we believe the general church." So that by this rule^ when St. 
Augustine says, that the manner was in cities, where there was liberty of religion, to 
ask, qua itur ad Catholicam ? we must translate it, which is the way to the general ? 
And when St. Hierom says, if we agree in faith with the bishop of Rome, ergo Catholic! 
sumus ; we must translate, " then we are generals." Is not this good stuff? 

(a) And as they suppress the name Catholic, even so did they, in their first English 
Bible, the name of church itself :+ because at their first revolt and apostacy from that 
church, which was universally known to be the only true Catholic church, it was a 
great objection against their schismatical proceedings, and stuck so much in the people's 
consciences, that they left and forsook the church, and the church condemned them : 
to obviate which, in the English translation of 1562, they so totally suppressed the 
word church, that it is not once to be found in all that Bible, so long read in their con- 
gregations ; because, knowing themselves not to be the church, they were resolved not 
to leave God Almighty any church at all, where they could possibly root it out, viz. in 
the Bible. And it is probable, if it had been as easy for them to have eradicated the 
church from the earth, as it was to blot the word out of their Bible, they would have 
prevented its " continuing to the end of the world." 

Another cause for their suppressing the name church was, " that it should never 
sound in the common people's ears out of the Scriptures," and that it might seem to 
the ignorant a good argument against the authority of the church, to say, " we find not 
this word church in all the Bible :" as in other articles, where they find not the express 
words in the Scripture. 

Our blessed Saviour says, " Upon this rock I will build my church ;" but they make 
him say, " Upon this rock I will build my congregation." They make the apostle St. 
Paul say to Timothy, 1 Ep. c. 3. " The house of God, which is the congregation, not 
the church, of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth." Thus they thrust out 
God's glorious, unspotted, and most beautiful spouse, the church ; and, in place of it, 
intrude their own little, wrinkled, and spotted congregation. So they boldly make the 
apostle say, " He hath made him head of the congregation, which is the body :" and, 
in another place, " The congregation of the First-born :" where the apostle mentions 
heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God, &.c. So that by this translation there is 
no longer any church militant and triumphant, but only congregation ; in which, they 
contradict St. Augustine, who affirms, that " though the Jewish congregation was some- 
times called a church, yet the apostles never called the church a congregation." But their 
last translation having restored the word church, I shall say no more of it in this place. 

(b) Again, the true church is known by unity, which mark is given her by Christ 
himself; in whose person Solomon speaking, says, " Una est Columba mea ,•" that is, 
" One is my dove," or, " My dove is one." Instead of this, they, being themselves full 
of sects and divisions, will have it, " My dove is alone ;" though neither the Hebrew 
nor Greek word hath that signification ; but, on the contrary, as properly signifies one, 
as uiius doth in Latin. But this is also amended in their last translation. 

(c) Nor was it enough for them to corrupt the Scripture against the church's unity ; 
for there was a time when their congregation was invisible ; that is to say, when " they 
were not at all :" and, therefore, because they will have it, that Christ may be without 
his church, to wit, a head without a body,§ they falsify this place in the Epistle to the 
Eph. c. 11. v. 22, 33. translating, " He gave him to be the Head over all things to the 
church," congregation with them, " which (church) is his body, the fulness of him that 
filleth all in all." Here they translate actively the Greek word <r« (orMpy/sys, when, ac- 
cording to St. Chrysostom, and all the Greek and Latin doctors' interpretations, it ought 
to be translated passively ; so that instead of saying, " and filleth all in all," they should 
say, " the fulness of him which is filled all in all ;" all faithful men as members, and the 
whole church as the body, concurring to the fulness of Christ the head. But thus they 
will not translate, " because," says Beza, " Christ needs no such compliment." And if 
he need it not, then he may be without a church ; and, consequently, it is no absurdity, 
if the church has been for many years not only invisible, but also " not at all." Would 
a man easily imagine, that such secret poison could lurk in their translations ? Thus they 
deal with the church ; let us now see how they use particular points of doctrine. 

* Bib. 1562, 1577. fEuseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. 2. c. 23. in fine. * Bible printed an. 1562. 
§ Protestants will have Christ to be a head without a body, during all that time that 
their congregation was invisible, viz. about 1500 years. 



20 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



THE BLESSED SAC 



RAMENT, 



Text. 



Accepit Jesus pa- 
nem et benedix- 
it, Kxi iuXoyno-cts, 
ac f regit deditque, 
&c.{a) 



Accepit Jesus pa- 
nem et benedi- 
cens, KdCi iv\oy»<r*s, 
&c.(b) 



Quern oportetqui- 
dem caelum susci- 
pere usque hi 
tempora restitu- 
tio?^ omnium, cv 
Sil Kf>u.vov <$i%*<rQ*i. 



Mittamus lignum 
in panem ejus.(d) 



At vero Melchi- 
zedek rex Salem s 
prof er ens panem et 
vinum erat enim 
sacerdos Dei altis- 
simi,{e) 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



Jesus took bread 
and " blessed,"and 
brake, and gave to 
his disciples. 



Jesus took 
bread, and " bless- 
ing," &c. 



Whom heaven 
truly must " re- 
ceive," until the 
times of the res- 
titution of all 
things. 



Let us cast wood 
upon his bread. 



And Melchize- 
dek, king of Sa- 
lem, brought forth 
bread and wine ; 
" for he was the 
priest of God most 
high." 



Corruptions in the 
Protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



Instead of 
" blessed," they 
translate, " and 
when he had given 
thanks."(a) 



Instead of bless- 
ing, they say, " and 
when he had given 
thanks."(£) 



Instead of re- 
ceive, they say, 
whom heaven 
must " contain." 
And Beza, " who 
must be contained 
in heaven."(c) 



« We will de- 
stroy his meat with 
wood." In another 
Bible, "Let us de- 
stroy the tree with 
the fruit."( d) 



Instead of " for 
he was the priest," 
they translate, 
" and he was the 
priest," &c. 



The last transfer 
lation of the 
Protestant Bi- 
ble, Edit. Lon- 
don,anno!683 



Corrected, 



Corrected. 



Corrected, 



Let us destroy 
the tree with tile 
fruit thereof. 



Instead of 
"for," they 
translate " and.*' 



ANfc SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 



21. 



faj The turning of blessing" into bare thanksgiving, was one of the first steps of our 
pretended reformers, towards denying the real presence. By endeavouring to take 
away the operation and efficacy of Christ's blessing, pronounced upon- the bread and 
wine, they would make it no more than a thanksgiving to God : and that, not only in 
translating thanksgiving for blessing, but also in urging the word eucharist, to prove it 
a mere thanksgiving ; though we find the verb iv%ctgissiv used also transitively by the 
Greek Fathers, saying, tcv apTov \vx*ejs»&v7*> panem & chalicem eucharistisatos ; or, panem, 
in quo gratis acts sunt ; that is, " The bread and cup made the eucharist ;" " The bread 
over which thanks are given ;" that is, " Which, by the word of prayer and thanksgiv- 
ing is made a consecrated meat, the flesh and blood of Christ."* St. Paul also, speak- 
ing of this sacrament, calls it, (1 Cor. 10.) " The chalice of benediction, which we do 
bless ;" which St. Cyprian thus explicates, " The chalice consecrated by solemn bless- 
ing." St. Basil and St. Chrysostom, in their liturgies, say thus, " Bless, O Lord, the sa- 
cred bread and " Bless, O Lord, the sacred cup, changing it by thy holy spirit ;" where 
are signified the consecration and transmutation thereof into the body and blood of Christ. 

fbj And, by this corrupt translation, they would have Christ so included in Heaven, 
that he cannot be with us upon the altar. Beza confesses, " That he translates it thus, 
on purpose to keep Christ's presence from the altar ;" which is so far from the Greek, 
that not only Illyricus, but even Calvin himself dislikes it. And you may easily judge, 
how contrary to St. Chrysostom it is, who tells us, " That Christ ascending into Heaven, 
both left us his flesh, and yet ascending hath the same." And again, " O miracle !" says 
he, " he that sits above with the Father, in the same moment of time is handled with the 
hands of all."f This, you see, is the faith and doctrine of the ancient fathers ; and it is 
the faith of the catholic church at this day. Who sees not, that this faith, thus to believe 
the presence of Christ in both places at once, because he is Omnipotent, is far greater 
than the protestant faith, which believes no farther than that he is ascended ; and that 
therefore he cannot be present upon the altar, nor dispose of his body as he pleases ? If 
we should ask them, whether he was also in Heaven, when he appeared to Saul going 
to Damascus ; or whether he can be both in heaven, and with his church on earth, to the 
end of the world, as he promised ; perhaps, by this doctrine of theirs, they would be 
put to a stand. (~c J 

Consider further, how plain our Saviour's words, "This is my body," are for the real 
presence of his body : and for the real presence of his blood in the chalice, what can be 
more plainly spoken, than — This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood, which 
chalice is shed for you : £ According to the Greek to <wor»piov to iH.xyvoy.wov the word 
" which" must needs be referred to the chalice ; in which speech chalice cannot other- 
wise be taken, than for that in the chalice ; which sure, must needs be the blood of 
Christ, and not wine, because his blood only was shed for us ; according to St. Chrysos- 
tom. who says, " That which is in the chalice is the same which gushed out of his side."§ 
And this deduction so troubled Beza, that he exclaims against all the Greek copies in 
the world, as corrupted in this place. 

CdJ "Let us cast wood upon his bread ;" that is, saith St. Hierom,|| " The cross up- 
on the body of our Saviour ; for it is he that said, I am the bread that descended from 
Heaven." Where the prophet so long before, saying bread, and meaning his body, al- 
ludes prophetically to his body in the blessed sacrament, made of bread, and under the 
form of bread ; and therefore also called bread by the apostle. (1 Cor. 10.) So that both in 
the prophet and the apostle, his bread and his body is all one. And lest we should think 
the bread only signifies his body, he says, "Let us put the cross upon his bread ;" that 
is, upon his very natural body that hung on the cross. It is evident, that the Hebrew 
verb is not now the same with that which the seventy interpreters translated into Greek, 
and St. Hierom into Latin ; but altered, as may be supposed, by the Jews, to obscure 
this prophecy of their crucifying Christ upon the cross. And though protestants will 
needs take the advantage of this corruption, yet so little does the Hebrew word, that 
now is, agree with the words following, that they cannot so translate it, as to make any 
commodious sense or understanding of it ; as appears by their different translations, and 
their transposing their words in English, otherwise than they are in the Hebrew.^ 

(~ej If protestants should grant Melchizedeck's typical sacrifice of bread and wine, 
then would follow also, a sacrifice of the New Testament ; which, to avoid, they pur- 
posely translate " and" in this place ; when, in other places, the same Hebrew particle 
vau, they translate enim, for ; not being ignorant, that it is in those, as in this place, bet- 
ter expressed by for or because, than by and. See the exposition of the fathers upon it.** 

* St. Justin in fine. 2 Apolog. St. lrenxus, lib. 4. 34, f Horn. 2. ad popul. Antioclu 
lib. 3. de Sacerdotio. + Luke 22, v. 20. § St. Chrysost. in 1 Cor. cap. 10. Horn. 24, 
|| St. Hierom. in com. in cap. 11. vers. 19. Hierem Prophetae. ^ Genes. 20. v. 3. Gen, 
30. v. 27. Isaiah, 64. v. 5. ** St. Cypr. Epist. 63. Epiphan. H{er. 55 and 79. St. Hie=- 
rom. in Matth, 26 & in Epist. ad kvagrium. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Ver. 



Proverbs, 
chap. 9. 
ver. 5. 



Proverbs, 
chap. 9. 
ver. 1. 



1 Corinth, 
chap. 11. 
ver. 27. 



1 Corinth. 

bap.. 9. 
ver. 13. 



1 Corinth, 
chap. 10. 
ver. 18. 



Daniel, 
chap. 14. 
ver. 12. 



Et ver. 17. 



Et etiam 
vers. 20. 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



Venite oomedite 
panem meum, & 
bibite vinum quod 
miscui vobis. K*xi- 



a-JLKJ. "]DD 



Immolavit victi- 
mas svas, miscuit 
vinum. 'utipiLs-ivfb J 



Itaque quicun- 
que manducaverit 
panem hunc vel » 
biberit calicetn do- 
mini indigne, &c, 

CO 



Et qui altari de- 
sei^viunt cum alta- 
ri participant, 6v<r- 



J\~onne qui edunt 
hostias participes 
sunt al talis. 6un- 



Quia fecerant sub 
mensa abscondittim 
introitum. rp*7ri£<t 

CfJ 



Intuitus rex men- 
sam. 



Et conswnebant 
qua erant super 
men sam. 



The true English I Corruptions in the 



according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



Come eat my 
bread and drink 
the wine which 1 
have " mingled" 
for you. 



She hath immo- 
lated her hosts.she 
hath " mingled" 
her wine. 



Therefore, who- 
soever shall eat 
this bread, " or" 
drink the chalice 
of our Lord un- 
worthily, &c. 



And they that 
serve the altar, 
participate with 
the altar. 



They that eat 
the hosts, are they 
not partakers of 
the " altar ?" 



For they had 
made a privy en- 
trance under the 
" table." 



The king be- 
holding the " ta- 
ble." 



And they did 
consume the 
things which were 
upon the " table." 



protestant Bi- 
ble, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



The corruption 
is, Drink the wine 
which I have 
" drawn" ;" in- 
stead of " min- 
gled." C a J 



She hath"drawn' 
her wine, fbj 



Instead of altar, 
they translate 
" temple." f d J 



Partakers of the 
temple." fej 



For, under the 
table, they say un- 
der the " altar." 

CO 



The king be- 
holding the " al- 
tar." 



Which was up- 
on the " altar." 



The last trans- 
lation of the 
protestant Bi- 
ble, edit. Lon- 
don, an. 1683. 



Come eat of 
my bread, and 
drink of the 
wine which 1 
have " ming- 
led." 



She hath kill- 
ed her beasts * 
she hath ming- 
led her wine. 



Wherefore, 
whosoever shall 
eat this bread 
and drink this 
cup of the Lord 
unworthily, &.c. 



Corrected. 



Corrected. 



The two last 
chapters they 
call apocrypha. 



THE B. SACRAMENT AND THE ALTAR. 



23 



fa, b J These prophetical words of Solomon are of great importance, as being a mani- 
fest prophecy of Christ's mingling water and wine in the chalice at his last supper ; which, 
at this day, the catholic church observes : but protestants, counting it an idle ceremony, 
frame their translation accordingly ; suppressing altogether this mixture or mingling, 
contrary to the true interpetration both of the Greek and Hebrew; as also, contrary to 
the ancient fathers' exposition of this place. " The Holy Ghost (says St. Cyprian) by 
Solomon, foreshoweth a type of our Lord's sacrifice, of the immolated host of bread and 
wine ; saying, Wisdom hath killed her hosts, she hath mingled her wine into the cup. 
Come ye, eat my bread, and drink the wine that I have mingled for you."* Speaking 
of wine mingled, (saith this holy doctor) he foresheweth prophetically, the cup of our 
Lord mingled with water and wine.f St. Justin, from the same Greek word, calls it, 
xpstfAct; that is, (according to Plutarch) Wine mingled with water: so likewise does St. 
Irenseus4 See also the sixth general council,^ treating largely hereof, and deducing it 
from the apostles and ancient fathers ; and interpreting this Greek word by another 
equivalent, and more plainly signifying this mixture, viz. /ueyvvvxt. 

fcj In this place, they very falsely translate And, instead of Or, contrary both to the 
Greek and Latin. And this they do on purpose, to infer a necessity of communicating 
under both kinds, as the conjunctive And may seem to do : whereas, by the disjunctive 
Or it is evident, that we may communicate in one kind only ; as was, in divers cases, the 
practice of the primitive church ; as also of the apostles themselves, (Act. 2. 42. &. 20. 7.) 

But the practice of our Saviour is the best witness of his doctrine : who, sitting at the 
table at Emaus|| with two of his disciples, " Took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and 
did reach to them." By which St. Augustine andlf the other fathers, understand the 
eucharist ; where no mention is made of wine, or the chalice : but the reaching of the 
bread, their knowing him, and his vanishing away, so joined, that not any time is left 
for the benediction and consecration of the chalice. 

In the primitive times, " It was the custom to administer the blood only to children," 
as St. Cyprian tells us : and, both he and Tertullian say, " That it was their practice, 
most commonly, to reserve the body of Christ :" which, as Eusebius witnesses, " They 
were wont to give alone to sick people, for their Viaticum." Also, " The holy hermits 
in the wilderness, commonly received and reserved the blessed body alone, and not the 
blood," as St. Basil tells us. 

For whole Christ is really present, under either kind, as protestants themselves have 
confessed; read their words in Hospinian,** a protestant, who affirms, " That they be- 
lieved and confessed whole Christ to be really present, exhibited and received under 
either kind : and therefore under the only form of bread: neither did they judge those 
to do evil, who communicated under one kind." And Luther, as alleged by Hospinian,fj 
says, " That it is not needful to give both kinds ; but as one alone sufficeth, the church 
has power of ordaining only one, and the people ought to be content therewith, if it be 
ordained by the church." Whence it is granted, that, " it is lawful for the church of 
God, upon just occasions, absolutely to determine or limit the use thereof." 

fd, e J To translate temple instead of altar, is so gross a corruption, that had it not 
been done thrice immediately within two chapters, one would have thought it had been 
done through oversight, and not on purpose. The name of altar both in Hebrew and 
Greek, and by the custom of all people, both Jews and Pagans, implies and imports a 
sacrifice. We therefore, with respect to the sacrifice of Chist's body and blood, say 
altar, rather than table, as all the ancient fathers were accustomed to speak and write'; 
though, with respect to eating and drinking Christ's body and blood, it is also called a 
table. But because protestants will have only a communion of bread and wine, or a 
supper, and no sacrifice ; therefore, they call it table only, and abhor the word altar, as 
papistical; especially in the first translation of 1562, which was made when they were 
throwing down altars throughout England. 

Cf J Where the name altar should be, they suppress it ; and here, where it should 
not be, they put it in their translations ; and that thrice in one chapter ; and that either 
on purpose to dishonour catholic altars, or else to save the credit of their communion 
table ; as fearing, lest the name of Bell's table might redound to the dishonour of their 
communion table. Wherein it is to be wondered, how they could imagine it any disgrace, 
either for table or altar, if the idols also had their tables and altars ; whereas St. Paul 
so plainly names both together ; " The table of our Lord, and the table of devils. If 
the table of devils, why not the table of Bell ? By this we see, how light a thing it was 
with them to corrupt the Scriptures in those days. 

* Ep. 63. 2. f Apol. 2. in fine, t St. Trenaeus lib. 5. prop. Init. § Concil. Constan- 
tinop. 6. Can. 32. || Luke 24. ver. 30, lib. 3. de Consensu. H Hier. Epitaph. Paulse. 
Beda. Theophylact. St. Cyprian. I. de lapsis, n. 10. Tertul. I. 2. ad Ux. n. 4. Euseb. 
Eccl. Hist. 1. 6. c. 36. St. Basil, Ep. ad Caesariam Patritiam. ** Hospin. Hist. Sacram. 
Y. 2. Fol. 112. ft lb. Fol. 12. %\ 1 Cor. 10. ver. 21. 



24 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



Statuerunt ut as- 
cenderent Paxdus 
& Barnabas, & 
quidam alii ex aliis 
ad apostolos & 
presbyteros 7rptr- 
fi-jnpxt in Jerusa- 
lem, &c. 



Jli/jus rei gratia 
reliqui te Crete t ut 
ea quae desunt cor- 
ridas, & const ituus 
per civitates pres- 
byteros, sicut & 
ego disposui tibi. 



Qui bene prxsunt 
presbyteri, duplici 
honor e digni habe- 
antur. 



Adversus pres- 
byterum accusati- 
onem noli recipere, 
&c. 



Infirmatur qids 
in vobis ? inducat 
presbyteros eccle- 
siae, & orent super 
eum. 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



They appointed 
that Paul and Bar- 
nabas sjioukl go 
up, and certain 
others of the rest, 
to the apostles and 
" priests" unto Je- 
rusalem. 



For : this cause 
left I thee in Crete 
that thou shouldst 
reform the things 
that are wanting, 
and shouldst or- 
dain " priests" by 
cities, as I also ap- 
pointed thee. 



The " priests" 
that rule well, let 
them be esteemed 
worthy of double 
honour. 



Against a 
" priest" receive 
not accusation, &c. 



Is any man sick 
among you ? let 
him bring in the 
" priests" of the 
church, and let 
them pray over 
him. 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



Instead of 
" priests," they 
translate "elders." 



Instead of 
" priests," they 
translate "elders." 



The elders that 
rule well, &c. 



Against an " el- 
der" receive not 
accusation, &c. 



Let 

him bring in the 
" elders" of the 
" congregation/' 
&c. 



The last transla- 
tion of the pro- 
testant Bible, 
edit. London, 
anno. 1683. 



For "priests," 
they say here 
also "elders." 



For " priests" 
they say elders. 



" Elders" also 
in this Bible. 



Instead of 
" priest" they 
put " elder." 



Elders for 
" priests" here 
also. 



PRIESTS AND PRIESTHOOD. 



25 



St. Augustine affirms, That in the divine Scripture several sacrifices are mentioned, 
some before the manifestation of the New Testament, &.c. and another now, which is 
agreeable to this manifestation, &c. and which is demonstrated not only from the evan- 
gelical, but also from the prophetical writings."* A truth most certain ; our sacrifice of 
the New Testament being most clearly proved from the sacrifice of Melchizedek in the 
Old Testament, of whom, and whose sacrifice, it is said, But Melchizedek, king of Sa- 
lem, brought forth bread and wine ; for he was the priest of God most high, and lie bles- 
sed him," &c. And to make the figure agree to the thing figured, and the truth to an- 
swer the figure of Christ, it is said, " Our Lord hath sworn, and it shall not repent him : 
thou art a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchizedek." In the New Testa- 
ment, Jesus is made a ' high priest, according to the order of Melchizedek.' " For ac- 
cording to the similitude of Melchizedek, there arises another priest — who continues for 
ever, and has an everlasting priesthood." Whence it is clearly proved, that Melchize- 
dek was a priest, and offered, bread and wine as a sacrifice ; therein prefiguring Christ 
our Saviour, and his sacrifice daily offered in the church, under the forms of bread and 
wine, by an everlasting priesthood. 

But the English protestants, on purpose to abolish the holy sacrifice of the mass, did 
not only take away the word altar out of the Scripture, but they also suppressed the 
name priest in all their translations, turning it into elder ;f well knowing that these three, 
priest, sacrifice, and altar, are dependents and consequents one of another ; so that they 
cannot be separated. If there be-an external sacrifice, there must be an external priest- 
hood to offer it, and an altar to offer the same upon. So Christ himself being a priest, 
according to the order of Melchizedek, had a sacrifice, "his body;" and an altar, "his 
cross," on which he offered it. And because he instituted this sacrifice, to continue in his 
church for ever, in commemoration and representation of his death, therefore did he or- 
dain his apostles priests, at his last supper ; where and when lie instituted the holy or- 
der of priesthood or priests, (saying Hoc facite, " Do this,") to offer the self-same sacrifice 
in a mystical and unbloody manner, until the world's end. 

But our new pretended reformers have made the Scriptures quite dumb, as to the 
name of any such priest or priesthood as we now speak of ; never so much as once nam- 
ing priest, unless when mention is made either of the priests of the Jews, or the priests 
of the Gentiles, especially when such are reprehended or blamed in the holy Scripture ; 
and in such places they are sure to name priests in their translations, on purpose to 
make the very name of priests odious among the common ignorant people. — Again, they 
have also the name priests, when they are taken for all manner of men, women, or 
children, that offer internal and spiritual sacrifices ; whereby they would falsely signify, 
that there are no other priests in the law of grace. As Whitaker,t one of their great 
champions, freely avouches, directly contrary to St. Augustine, who, in one brief sen- 
tence, distinguishes priests, properly so called in the church; and priests, as it is a 
common name to all Christians. This name then of priest and priesthood, properly so 
called, as St. Augustine says, they wholly suppress ; never translating the word presbyte- 
ros, " priests;" but " elders ;*' and that with so full and general consent in all their 
English Bibles, that, as the puritans plainly confess, am 1 Mr. Whitgift denies it not, a 
man would wonder to see how careful they are, that the people may not once hear of 
the name of any such priest in all the holy Scriptures : and even in their latter transla- 
tions, though they are ashamed of the word " eldership," yet they have not the power to 
put the English word priesthood, as they ought to do, in the text, that the vulgar may 
understand it, but rather the Greek word presbytery : such are the poor shifts they are 
glad to make use of. 

So blinded were these innovators with heresy, that they could not see how the holy 
Scriptures, the Fathers, and ecclesiastical custom, have drawn several words from the! t 
profane and common signification, to a more peculiar and ecclesiastical one ; as episcr/- 
pus, which in Tully is an " overseer," is a bishop in the New Testament ; so the Greek 
word x tl p1°Mh signifying «• ordain," they translate as profanely as if they were translating 
Demosthenes, or the laws of Athens, rather than the holy Scriptures ,* when,.as St. Hie 1 , 
torn tells them,§ it signifieth clericorum ordinationem ; that is " Giving of holy orders* 
which is done not only by prayer of the voice, but by imposition of the hand," according 
to St Paul to Timothy, "Impose hands suddenly on no man," that is, "Be not hasty to 
give holy orders." In like manner, they translate minister for deacon, ambassador for 
apostle, messenger for angel, &c. leaving, I say, the ecclesiastical use of the word for the 
original signification. 

* St. August. Ep. 49. q. 3. f Psal. 110. ver. 4. Heb. 6. ver. 20. and chap. 7. ver. 15, 
17, 24. * Whitaker, pag. 199. St. Aug. lib. 20. de Civit. Dei, cap. 10. See the puritan's 
reply, pag. 159. And Whitgift's Defence against the Puritans, pag. 722. § St. Hierom*, 
in cap. 58. Esai. 

4 



26 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Et cum con- 
stituissent 
Tov«VrtVT«f] Mis per 
si7igulas ecclesias 
presbyteros. 



(b) JVoli negli- 
gere gTatiam fost- 
pitrjuaLTOi] qu<z in te 
est, quae data est ti- 
bi per prophetiam 
cum impositione 
manuum presbyte- 
rii. 



Propter quam 
causam admoneo te, 
ut resuscites gra- 
tiam Dei, quce in te 
est per impositio- 
nem manuum mea- 



(c) Diaconos si- 
militer pudicos, 
non belingues, &c. 



(J) dia- 
coni, 



The true English, 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



And when they 
had ordained to 
them ' priests' in 
every { church.' 



Neglect not the 
' grace' that is in 
thee, which is giv- 
en thee by pro- 
phecy, with im- 
position of the 
hands of * priest- 
hood.' 



For the which 
cause I admonish 
thee, that thou re- 
suscitate the 
' grace' of God, 
which is in thee, 
by the imposition 
of my hands. 



' Deacons' in like 
manner ' chaste,' 
not double- 
tongued, Sec. 



Deacons, 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) And when 
they had ordained 
' elders by elec- 
tion,' in every 
congregation. 



(b) Instead of 
grace,' they 
translate * gift 
and 1 eldership' in- 
stead of 'priest- 
hood.' 



Instead of the 
word 'grace,' they 
say ' gift.' 



(c) ' Ministers' 
for ' deacons.' 



The last transla* 
tion of the 
protestant Bi- 
ble, edit Lon- 
don, an. 1683. 



' Elders' set 
in the stead of 
' priests.' 



For the word 
'grace' they say 
'gift;' and 'pres- 
bytery,' the 
Greek word, ra- 
ther than the 
English word 
' priesthood.' 



They trans- 
late 'gift,' in the 
stead of 'grace.' 



Likewise must 
the ' deacons be 
grave.' 



(d) Deacons. 



Deacon?, 



PRIESTHOOD AND HOLY ORDERS. 



2t 



(a) Wb have heard, in old time, of making priests ; and, of late days, of making 
ministers ; but who has ever heard in England of making elders by election ? yet, in their 
first translations, it continued a phrase of Scripture till king James the First's time ; and 
then they thought good to blot out the words " by election," beginning to consider, 
that such elders as were made only by election, without consecration, could not pretend 
to much more power of administering the sacraments, than a churchwarden, or consta- 
ble of the parish ; for, if they denied ordination to be a sacrament,* and, consequently, 
to give grace, and impress a character, doubtless they could not attribute much to a 
bare election : and yet, in those days, when this translation was made, their doctrine 
was, " that in the New Testament, election, without consecration, was sufficient to make 
a priest or bishop witness Cranmer himself, who being asked, Whether in the New 
Testament there is a required any consecration of a bishop or priest ? answered thus, 
under his hand, viz. " In the New Testament, he that is appointed to be a priest or bi- 
shop, needeth no consecration by the Scripture ; for election thereunto is sufficient,"! and 
Dr. Stillingfleet informs us, that Cranmer has declared, " that a governor could make 
priests, as well as bishops." And Mr. Whitaker tells us, " that there are no priests now 
in the church of Christ," page 200, advers. Camp, that is, as he interprets himself, page 
210, " This name priest is never in the New Testament peculiarly applied to the minis- 
ters of the gospel." And we are not ignorant, how both king Edward the Sixth, and 
queen Elizabeth, made bishops by their letters patent only, let our Lambeth records pre- 
tend what they will : to authorize which, it is no wonder, if they made the Scripture say, 
" When they had ordained elders by election," instead of " priests by imposition of 
hands ;" though contrary to the fourth council of Carthage, which enjoins, " That when 
a priest takes his orders, the bishop blessing him, and holding his hand upon his head, 
all the priests also that are present, hold their hands by the bishop's hand, upon his 
head."^ So are our priests made at this day ; and so would now the clergy of the church 
of England pretend to be made, if they had but bishops and priests able to make them. 
For which purpose, they have not only corrected this error in their last translations, but 
have also gotten the words, bishop and priest, thrust into their forms of ordination : but 
the man that wants hands to work with, is not much better for having tools. 

(6)Moreover, some of our pretenders to priesthood, would gladly have holy order to take 
its place again among the sacraments : and, therefore, both Dr. Bramhal and Mr. Mason, 
reckon it for a sacrament, though quite contrary to their Scripture translators, § who, lest 
it should be so accounted, do translate " gift" instead of " grace ;" lest it should appear, 
that grace is given in holy orders. I wonder they have not corrected this in their latter 
translations : but, perhaps, they durst not do it, for fear of making it clash with the 25th 
of their 39 articles. It is no less to be admired, that, since they began to be enamoured 
of priesthood, they have not displaced that profane intruder, " elder," and placed the 
true ecclesiastical word, "priest," in the text. But to this I hear them object, that our 
Latin translation hath seniores et majores natu ,• and, therefore, why may not they also 
translate " elders ?" To which I answer, that this is nothing to them, who profess to 
translate the Greek, and not our Latin ; and the Greek word they know is 7r^<rCvlip^ t 
presbyteros. Again, 1 say, that if they meant no worse than the old Latin translator did, 
they would be as indifferent as he, to have said sometimes priest and priesthood, when 
he has the words presbyteros and presbyterium, as we are indifferent in our translation, 
saying seniors and ancients, when we find it so in Latin : being well assured, that by 
sundry words he meant but one thing, as in Greek it is but one. St. Hierom reads, pres- 
byteros ego compresbyter\\ in 1. ad Gal. proving the dignity of priests: and yet in the 4th 
of the Galatians, he reads, according to the Vulgate Latin text, seniores in vobis rogo 
consenior et ipse : whereby it is evident, that senior here, and in the Acts, is a priest ; 
and not, on the contrary, presbyter, an elder. 

(c) In this place they thrust the word minister into the text/for an ecclesiastical order : 
so that, though they will not have bishops, priests, and deacons, yet they would gladly 
have bishops, ministers, and deacons ; yet the word they translate for minister, is fouxovcc, 
diaconus ; the very same that, a little after, they translate deacon, (d) And so, because 
bishops went before in the same chapter, they have found out three orders, bishops, minis- 
ters, and deacons. How poor a shift is this, that they are forced to make the apostles speak 
three things for two, on purpose to get a place in the Scripture for their ministers ! — As 
likewise, in another place, If on purpose to make room for their ministers' wives, for there 
is no living without them, they translate wife instead of woman, making St. Paul say, " Have 
not we power to lead about a wife," &c. for which cause they had rather say grave 
than chaste. 

* 25th of the 39 articles, f See Dr. Burnet's Hist, of the Refor. See Stillingfleet 
Irenicon. p. 392. + Council 3. anno 436. where St. Augustine was present and subscribed. 
§ Dr. Bramh. p. 9(3, Mason, lib. 1. U St. Hier. Ep. 85. ad Evagr. % 1 Cor. 9. verse 5, 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Ver. 



Apocalyp. 
chapt. 2, 3. 
v. 1, 8, 12. 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Labia enim 
sacerdotis custo- 
dient scientiam, et 
legem requirent ex 
ore ejus : quia an- 
gelus do mini exer- 
cituum eat. 



Angelo Ephesi 
ecclesue scribe. 



(b) Ecce ego 
mitto angelum me- 
um, [vcv uyyekov /uv] 
et pi\epurabit viam 
ante facie m meam. 
Et statim veniet ad 
templum suum do- 
minator, quern vos 
queritis, et angelus 
Testamenti, quern 
vos vultis. 



Hie est enim de 
quo scriptum est, 
ecce ego mitto an- 
gelum meum ante 
faciem tuam. 



Hie est de quo 
scriptum est, ecce 
mitto angelum me- 
um, &c. 



(c) Si quid do- 
navi propter vos in 
persona Christi. 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



The priests lips 
" shall" keep 
knowledge, and 
they " shall" seek 
the law at his 
mouth ; because 
he is the " angel" 
of the Lord of 
Hosts. 



To the " angel" 
of the church of 
Ephesus, write 
thou. 



Behold, I send 
mine "angel," and 
he shall prepare 
the way before my 
face. And'the Ru- 
ler whom ye seek, 
shall suddenly 
come to his tem- 
ple, even the "an- 
gel" of the Testa- 
ment, whom ye 
wish for. 



For this is he of 
whom it is writ- 
ten, Behold,! send 
mine " angel" be- 
fore thy face. 



This is he of 
whom it is writ- 
ten, Behold, I send 
mine " angel," 
&q. 



If I pardoned 
any thing for you 
in the "person" 
of Christ. 



Corruptions in the 
Protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) The priests 
lips " should" 
keep knowledge, 
and they " should" 
seek the law at his 
mouth ; because 
he is the " Mes- 
senger" of the 
Lord of Hosts. 



To the " mes- 
senger" of, &c< 



instead of 
gel." 



(b) Instead of 
" angel," they say 
" messenger." 
And for "angel" 
of the Testament, 
they translate, 
" messenger" of 
the covenant. 



For " angel" 
they say " messen- 
ger." 



— Behold! send 
my " messenger," 
&c. 



(c) In the 

sight" of Christ. 



The last trans- 
lation of the 
Protestant Bi- 
ble, Edit. Lon- 
don,anno 1683. 



For " shall" 
they translate 
" should." 

And for " an- 
gel" " messen- 
ger" in this also.. 



Corrected. 



The same also 
they translate 
here, without 
any correction. 



Instead of "an- 
gel," they say 
" messenger." 



For "angel," 
messenger." 



Corrected. 



THE AUTHORITY OF PRIESTS. 



29 



(a) Because our pretended reformers teach, " That order is not a sacrament ;" " That 
it has neither visible sign," what is imposition of hands? "nor ceremony ordained by 
God; nor form; nor institution from Christ,"* consequently, that it cannot imprint a 
character on the soul of the person ordained; they not only avoid the word " priests/* in 
their translations, but, the more to derogate from the privilege and dignity of priests, 
they make the Scripture, in this place, speak contrary to the words of the prophet ; as 
they are read both in the Hebrew and Greek, <pvka%il*i ^nWf, y&ps* ; where it 
is as plain as can be spoken, that, " The priests' lips shall keep knowledge, and they 
shall seek the law at his mouth," which is a wonderful privilege given to the priests of 
the old law, for true determination in matters of controversy, and rightly expounding 
the law, as we may read more fully in Deuteronomy the 17th, where they are command- 
ed, under pain of death, to stand to the priest's judgment : which in this place, ver. 4. 
God, by his prophet Malachi, calls, " His covenant with Levi," and that he will have it 
to stand, to wit, in the New Testament, where St. Peter has such privilege for him and 
his successors, that his faith shall not fail ; and where the Holy Ghost is president in the 
councils of bishops and priests. All which, the reformers of our days would deface and 
defeat, by translating the words otherwise than the Holy Ghost has spoken them. And 
when the prophet adds immediately the cause of this singular prerogative of the priest : 
"Because he is the angel of the Lord of hosts," which is also a wonderful dignity to be 
so called ; they translate, "Because he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts." So they 
also, in the Revelations, call the bishops of the seven churches of Asia, messengers. 

(b) And here, in like manner, they call St. John the Baptist, messenger ; where the 
Scripture, no doubt, speaks more honourably of him, as being Christ's precursor, than 
of a messenger, which is a term for postboys and lacqueys. The Scripture, I say, speaks 
more honourably of him: and our Saviour, in the Gospel, telling the people the won- 
derful dignities of St. John, and that he was more than a prophet, cites this place, and 
gives this reason, " For this is he, of whom it is written, behold, 1 send my angel before 
thee :" which St. Hierom calls, meritorum etufyaiv, the " Increase and augmenting of 
John's merits and privileges."! And St. Gregory, " He who came to bring tidings of 
Christ himself, was worthily called an angel, that in his very name there might be digni- 
ty." And all the fathers conceive a great excellency of this word angel ; but our pro- 
testants, who measure all divine things and persons by the line of their human under- 
standing, translate accordingly ; making our Saviour say, that " John was more than a 
prophet," because he was a messenger. Yea, where our blessed Saviour himself is 
called, Angelas Testametiti, the angel of the Testament ; there they translate, the " Mes- 
senger of the Covenant. "(c) 

(c) St. Hierom translated not Nuncius, but Angelus, the church, and all antiquity, 
both reading and expounding it as a term of more dignity and excellency : why do the 

. innovators of our age thus boldly disgrace the very eloquence of Scripture, which, by 
such terms of amplification, would speak more significantly and emphatically ? Why, I 
say, do they for angel translate messenger ? for apostle, legate or ambassador, and the 
like ? Doubtless, this is all done to take away, as much as possible, the dignity and ex- 
cellency of priesthood. Yet, methinks, they should have corrected this in their latter 
translations, when they began themselves to aspire to the title of priests ; whose name, 
however, they may usurp, yet could not hitherto attain to the authority and power of 
the priesthood. They are but priests in name only ; the power they want, and there- 
fore are pleased to be content with the ordinary stile of messengers ; not yet daring to 
term themselves angels, as St. John did the bishops of the seven churches of Asia. 

(d) But, great is the authority, dignity, excellency, and power of God's priests and 
bishops : they do bind and loose, and execute all ecclesiastical functions, as in the per- 
son and power of Christ, whose ministers they are. So St. Paul says, " That when he 
pardoned or released the -penance of the incestuous Corinthian, he did it in the person 
of Christ they falsely translate, " In the sight of Christ ;" that is, as St. Ambrose ex- 
pounds it, "In the name of Christ," "In his stead," and as " His vicar and deputy :" 
and when he excommunicated the same incestuous person, he said, " He did it in the 
name, and by virtue of our Lord Jesus Christ. "§ — And the fathers of the council of 
Ephesus avouch, " That no man doubts, yea, it is known to all ages, that holy and most 
blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith, and foundation of 
the Catholic church, received from our Lord Jesus Christ, the keys of the kingdom ; and 
that power of loosing and binding sins was given him ; who, in his successors, lives and 
exercises judgment to this very time, and always."|| 

* 25th of the 39 articles. Rogers' Defence of the same, page 155. f St. Hierom. in 
Comment, in hunc locum. St. Greg. Horn. 6. in Evang. * 2 Cor. 2. ver. 10. § 1 Cor, 
5. ver. 4. U Part. 2. Acts 3. 



30 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book,! The Vulgate Latin 
Chapter, \ Text, 
and Ver, 



Matthew, 
chapt. 2. 
verse 6. 

Micah, 
chapt. 5. 

verse 2. 



1 Peter, 
chapt. 2. 
verse 13. 



Acts Apos. 
chapt. 20. 
verse 28. 



(a) Ex le enim 
exiet dux, qui re 
gat populum meum 
Israel. 

t» ilv*t (is etpxovT* 



(6) Subjecti igi- 
tur estote omni hu 
man<e creaturae 
\axra.7V[ ctvBpa>7riv>i 
KTieru] propter He 
um, sive regi quasi 
pracellenti, sive 
ducibus, &c. 



(c) Attendite 
vobis et universo 
gregi, in quo vos 
Spiritus Sanctus 
posuit episcopos 
regere ecclesiam 
Dei. 

VitV TW iKKXHO-tOtV Tit 

0e»] 



The true English 
according to the 
lihemish trans- 
lation. 



For out of thee 
shall come forth 
the captain, that 
shall " rule" my 
people Israel. 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577 
1579. 



(a) Instead of 
" rule," the New 
Testament, print 
ed anno 1580, 
translates "feed.' 



Be subject 
therefore " to ev- 
ery human crea- 
ture" for God, 
whether it be to 
the " king" as ex- 
celling, &c. 



Take heed to 
yourselves, and to 
the whole flock, 
wherein the Holy 
Ghost hath placed 
you " bishops to 
rule" the church 
of God. 



(b) In the latter 
end of king Henry 
the VIII. and in 
Edward the VI. 
times, they trans 
lated, " submit 
yourselves unto all 
manner of ordi- 
nance of man,' 
whether it be un 
to the king, as " to 
the chief head. 

In the Bible of 
1577. Tatheking 
as " having pre- 
eminence." 

In the Bible 
1579. To the 
king, as the " su- 
perior." 



(c) Where- 
in the Holy Ghost 
hath " made you 
overseers," to 
" feed the congre- 
gation" of God. 



The last transla- 
tion of the pro- 
testant Bible, 
Edit. London, 
anno 1683. . 



Corrected. 



Submit your- 
selves to every 
ordinance of 
man, for the 
Lord's sake, 
" whether it be 
to the king," as 
supreme. 



Wherein 

the Holy Ghost 
hath made you 
overseers,to feed 
the church of 
God. 



EPISCOPAL AUTHORITY. 



Si 



(a) It is certain, that this is a false translation ; because the prophet's words (Mich. 5. cited by 
St. Matthew) both in Hebrew and Greek, signify only a ruler or governor, and not a pastor or feeder. 
Therefore, it is either a great oversight, which is a small matter, compared to the least corrup- 
tion ; or else it is done on purpose ; which I rather think, because they do the like in another place, 
(Acts 20.) as you may see below. And that to suppress the signification of ecclesiastical power 
and government, that concurs with feeding, first in Christ, and from him in his apostles and pastors 
of the church ; both which are here signified in this one Greek word, <wot/uidlvu) ; to wit, that Christ 
our Saviour shall rule and feed,* yea, he shall rule with a rod of iron ; and from him, St. Peter, 
and the rest, by his commission given in the same word, W^ca/vs, feed and rule my sheep ; yea, and 
that with a rod of iron : as when he struck Ananias and Sapphira with corporal death ; as his suc- 
cessors do the like offenders with spiritual destruction (unless they repent) by the terrible rod of 
excommunication. This is imported in the double signification of the Greek word, which they, to 
diminish ecclesiastical authority, rather translate "feed," than "rule or govern." 

(6) For the diminution of this ecclesiastical authority, they translated this text of Scripture, in 
king Henry VTII. and king Edward VI. times ; " Unto the king as the chief head," (1 Pet. 2.) be- 
cause then the king had first taken upon him this title of " Supreme head of the church." And 
therefore they flattered both him and his young son, till their heresy was planted ; making the holy 
Scripture say, that the king was the " Chief head," which is all the same with supreme head, But,, 
in queen Elizabeth's time, being, it seems, better advised in that point, (by Calvin, I suppose, and 
the Magdeburgenses, who jointly inveighed against that title ;f and Calvin, against that by name, 
which was given to Henry the VHIth) and because, perhaps, they thought they could be bolder 
with a queen than a king ; as also, because then they thought their reformation pretty well esta- 
blished ; they began to suppress this title in their translations, and to say, " To the king, as having 
pre-eminence," and " To the king, as the superior ;" endeavouring, as may be supposed by this 
translation, to encroach upon that ecclesiastical and spiritual jurisdiction they had formerly granted 
to the crown. 

But however that be, let them either justify their translation, or confess their fault : and for the 
rest, I will refer them to the words of St. Ignatius, who lived in the apostles' time, and tells us, 
" That we must first honour God, then the bishop, then the king ; because in all things, nothing is 
comparable to God , and in the church, nothing greater than the bishop, who is consecrated to God, 
for the salvation of the world ; and among magistrates and temporal rulers, none is like the king."£ 

(c) Again, observe how they here suppress the word " Bishop," and translate it " overseers;" 
which is a word, that has as much relation to a temporal magistrate, as to a Bishop. And this they 
do, because in king Edward the VI. and queen Elizabeth's time, they had no episcopal consecra- 
tion, but were made only by their letters patent ;§ which, I suppose, they will not deny. Howev- 
er, when they read of king Edward the Vlth making John a Lasco (a Polonian) overseer or su- 
perintendant, by his letters patent; and of their making each other superintendants, or pastors at 
Frankfort, by election ; and such only to continue for a time ; or so long as themselves, or the con- 
gregation pleased ; and then to return again to the state of private persons, or laymen ; Vid. Hist, 
of the Troubles at Frankfort ;|| and also of king Edward's giving power and authority to Cranmer; 
and how Cranmer, when he made priests, by election only, I suppose, because they were to con- 
tinue no longer than the king pleased ; whereas priests truly consecrated, are marked with an in- 
delible character, pretended to no other authority for such act, but only what he received from 
the king, by virtue of his letters patent. Fox torn. 2. an. 1546, 1547. 

And we have reason to judge, that Matthew Parker, and the rest of queen Elizabeth's new bishops, 
were no otherwise made, than by the queen's letters patent ; seeing that the form devised by king 
Edward VI. being repealed by queen Mary, was not again revived till the 8th of queen Elizabeth. 
To say nothing of the invalidity of the said form; as having neither the name of bishop nor priest 
in it, the like doubt of their consecration, arises from the many and great objections made by Ca- 
tholic writers^ against their pretended Lambeth records and register ; as also from the consecra- 
tors of M. Parker, viz. Barlow, Scorey, &c. whom we cannot believe to have been consecrated 
themselves, unless they can first show us records of Barlow's consecration ; and secondly, tell us, 
by what form of consecration Coverdale and Scorey were made bishops ; the Rom. Cath. ordinal 
having been abrogated, and the new one not yet devised, at the time that Mason says they were 
consecrated ; which was Aug. 30, 1551. And as for the suffragan, there is such a difference about 
his name,** some calling him John, some Richard; and about the place where he lived: some 
calling him suffragan of Bedford,ff some of Dover,^ that it is doubtful whether there was such a 
person present at that Lambeth ceremony. But these things being fitter for another treatise, 
which, 1 hope, you will be presented with ere long, I shall say no more of them in this place. 

* Psalm. 2. Apocalyp. 2. v. 27. Job. 21. f Calvin in cap. 7. Amos. Magdebur. in Prtef. Cent. 7. 
fol. 9, 10, 11. * Ep. 7. ad. Smyrnenses. § K. Edw. VI. Let. Pat. Jo. Utenti. p. 71. Regist. Eccles. 
peregr. Londin. Calvin, p. 327. Resp. ad. Persecut. Angl. U Hist. Fra. pag. 51, 60, 62, 63, 72, 73, 74, 
87, 97, 99, 125, 126, &c. % Fitzherb. Dr. Champ. Nullity of the English Clergy prot. demonst. &c„j 
** See Dr. Bramhall, p. 98. ff Mason, Bramhall, &c. # Dr. Butler Epist. de Consecrat. MinisU 



32 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Numquid 
non habemus potes- 
tatem mulierem, 
sororem aJgX^/iv yv- 
v*7**, circiunducen- 
di P &c. 



(6) Etiam, rogo 
& te germane 
compar, <r6£vy% 
yv*<rn. 



(c) Honorabile 
connubium in om- 
nibus, TifAios o y*- 
fxo( ev 7tA<xi y & tho- 
rusimmaculalus. 



(d) Qiri dixit il- 
lis, non ovnnes ca- 
p'mntverbum istud, 
a iTstvTec ^upmri, sed 
quibus datum est. 



(e) Et sunt eu- 
nuchi, qui seipsos 
castraverunt, ivva- 
%ot onms 

tzurovt, propter 
Regnum Ccehrum. 



The true English 
according to the 
lihemish trans- 
lation. 



Have not we 
power to lead a- 
bout a ' Woman,' 
a sister, &c. 



Yea, and 1 be- 
seech thee, my 
sincere * compan- 
ion.' 



Marriage hon- 
ourable in all, and 
the bed undefiled. 



Who said to 
them, 1 Not all 
take this word ;' 
but they to whom 
it is given. 



And there are 
* eunuchs' who 
have made them- 
selves * eunuchs' 
for the kingdom 
of Heaven. 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(«) Have not 
we power to lead 
about a " wife," a 
sister ? &c. 



(by For compa- 
nion, they say, 
< Yoke-fellow.' 



(c) 'Wedlock' 
is honourable a- 
mong all men, &c. 



(d) 

men cannot 



All 

re- 



ceive this saying,' 
&c. 



(e) There are 
some * chaste' 
which have made 
themselves 
* chaste' for the 

ing 
ven. 



The last transla- 
tion of the pro- 
testant Bible, 
edit. London, 
anno. 1683. 



Instead of 
* woman,' they 
translate ' wife' 
here also. 



Yoke« 



fellow.' 



' Marriage* \z 
honourable in 
all. 



'All 

men' cannot re- 
ceive this say- 
ing, &c. 



Corrected. 



THE SINGLE LIVES OF PRIESTS, ETC. 



33 



(a) " If," says St. Hierom, " none of the laity, or of the faithful, can pray, unless he 
forbear conjugal duty, priests, to whom it belongs to offer sacrifices for the people, are 
always to pray ; if to pray always, therefore perpetually to live single or unmarried."* But 
our late pretended reformers, the more to profane the sacred order of priesthood, to 
which continency and single life have always been annexed in the New Testament, and 
to make it merely laical and popular, will have all to be married men ; yea, those that 
have vowed to .the contrary : and it is a great credit among them, for apostate priests 
to take wives. And, therefore, by their falsely corrupting this text of St. Paul, they 
will needs have him to say, that he, and the rest of the apostles, " Led their wives about 
with them," (as king Edward the Sixth's German apostles did theirs, when they came 
first into England, at the call of the lord protector Seymour ;) whereas the apostle says 
nothing else, but a woman, a sister ; meaning such a Christian woman as followed Christ 
and the apostks, to find and maintain them with their substance. So does St. Hierom 
interpret it,f and St. Augustine also ; both directly proving, that it cannot be translated 
" wife." (b) Neither ought this text to be translated " yoke-fellow," as our innovators 
do, on purpose to make it sound in English, " man and wife." Indeed, Calvin and Beza 
translate it in the masculine gender, for a " companion." And St. Theophylact, a Greek 
father, saith, that " If St. Paul had spoken to a woman, it should have been ywa-ia, in 
Greek." St. Paul says himself, he had no wife, (1 Cor. 7.) And I think weiiave a little 
more reason to believe him, than those who would gladly have him married, on purpose 
to cloak the sensualit}' of a few fallen priests. In the first chapter of the Acts, verse 14. 
Beza translates, cum uzoribus, " with their wives," because he would have all the apos- 
tles there esteemed as married men ; whereas the words are cum mulieribus, " with the 
women," as our English translations also have it ; because, in this place, they were 
ashamed to follow their master, Beza. 

(c) Again, for the marriage of priests, and all sorts of men indifferently, they corrupt 
this text, making two falsifications in one verse : the one is, " among all men :" the 
other, that they make it an aifirmative speech, by adding " is," whereas the apostle's 
words are these, " Marriage honourable in all, and the bed undefiled ;" which is rather 
an exhortation ; as if he should say, " Let marriage be honourable in all, and "the bed 
undefiled as appears, both by that which goes before, and that which follows imme- 
diately ; all which are exhortations. Let, therefore, protestants give us a reason 'out of 
the Greek text, why they translate the words following, by way of exhortation, " Let 
your conversation be without covetousness ;" and not these words also in like manner, 
" Let marriage be honourable in all." The phraseology and construction of both are 
similar in the Greek. 

(</) Moreover, it is against the profession of continency in priests and others, that 
they translate our Saviour's words respecting a " single life," and the " unmarried state," 
thus, " all men cannot," 8cc. as though it were impossible to five continent: where Christ 
said not, n That all men cannot," but, " All men do not receive this saying." St. Au- 
gustine says, " Whosoever have not this gift ,of chastity given them, it is either because 
they will not have it, or because they fulfil not that which they will : and they that have 
this word, have it of God, and their own free will."t " This gift," says Origen, " is 
given to all that ask for it."§ 

(e) Nor do they translate this text exactly, nor, perhaps, with a sincere meaning ; for, 
if there be chastity in marriage, as well as in the single life, as Paphnutius the confessor 
most truly said, and as themselves are wont often to allege, then their translation doth 
by no means express our Saviour's meaning, when they say, " There are some chaste, 
who have made themselves chaste," Scc.for a man might say, all do so, who live chastely 
in matrimony. Bat our Saviour speaks of such as have made themselves eunuchs for 
the kingdom of Heaven ; not by cutting off those parts which belong to generation, for 
that would be a horrible and mortal sin ; but by making themselves unable and impotent 
for generation, by promise, and vow of perpetual chastity, which is a spiritual castration 
of themselves. 

St. Basil calls the marriage of the clergy " fornication," and not " matrimony." 

*• Of canonical persons," says'he, "the fornication must not be reputed matrimony, be- 
cause the conjunction of these is altogether prohibited ; for this is altogether profitable 
for the security of the church." And in his epistle to a certain prelate, he cites these 
words from the council cf Nice : " It is by the great council forbidden, in all cases what- 
soever, that it should be lawful for a bishop, priest, or deacon, or for any whomsoever, 
that are in orders, to have a woman live with them ; except only their mother, sister, or 
aunt, or such persons as are void of all suspicion."|| 

* St. Hierom. lib. contr. Jovin. cap.' 19. 1 Cor. 7. 5 5 35. f Lib. 1. adversus Jovin. de 
op. mon. cap. 4. Lib. 2. cap. 24. i Lib. de Gratia Sc Liber. Arbitr. cap. 4. § Tract. 7. in 
Matth. || St. Basil, Ep. 1 . ad Amphilcch. Ep. 17. ad Paregor. Presbyt. Con. Nice, in Cod, 
Grse. Can. 3. 5 



34 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter) 
and Ver, 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



Acts Apos. 
chapt. 19. 
verse 3. 



Titus, 
chapt. 3. 
verse 5, 6. 



(a) In quo s'?t/, 
ergo baptizati es- 
tis ? qui dixerunt, 
in Johannis Bap- 
tismate. 



(b) Non ex ope- 
ribus justitice, quce 
fecimus nos, sed se- 
cundum suam mi- 
sericordiam salvos 
nos fecit ; per la- 
vacrum regenera- 
tions et renovatio- 
nis Spiritus Sancti, 
quern effudit innos 
abunde per Jesum 
Christum Salvato- 
rem nostrum. 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



* In* what then 
were you bap- 
tized ? who said, 
' In* John's bap- 
tism. 



Not by the 
works of justice, 
which we did ; 
but according to 
his mercy, he hath 
saved us ; by the 
laver of regenera- 
tion, and renova- 
tion of the Holy 
Ghost, ' whom he 
hath poured' upon 
us abundantly, by 
Jesus Christ our 
Saviour. 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) * Unto' 
what then were 
you baptized ? 
' and they' said, 
* Unto' John's bap- 
tism. 



(b) — By the 
* fountain' of the 
regeneration of 
the Holy Ghost, 
1 which he shed 
on' us, &c. 



The last transla- 
tion of the pro- 
testant Bible, 
Edit. London, 
anno 1683. 



'. Unto' what 
then were ye 
baptized ? and 
they said, * Unto' 
John's baptism. 



Not by works 
of righteousness, 
which we have 
done; but ac- 
cording to his 
mercy, he saved 
us; by the 'wash- 
ing' of regenera- 
tion, and renew- 
ing of the Holy 
Ghost,' which he 
shed' on us, &c , 



THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM. 



35 



In the beginning of the reformation, they not only took away five of the seven sacra- 
ments, but also deprived the rest of all grace, virtue, and efficacy ; making tbem no more 
than poor and beggarly elements ; at the most, no better than those of the Jewish law. 
And this, because they would not have them by any means helpful, or necessary towards 
our salvation ; for the obtaining of which, they held and asserted, that " Faith alone was 
sufficient."* 

For which reason Beza was not content to say, with the apostle, (Rom. 4. v. 11.) 

That circumcision was a seal of the justice of faith;" but because he thought that 
term too low for the dignity of circumcision, he (to use his own words) " gladly avoids 
it ;" putting the verb instead of the noun, quod obsignaret, for sigillum. And in his anno- 
tations upon the same place, he declares the reason of his so doing to be, the dignity of 
circumcision equal with any sacrament in the New Testament. His words are, " What 
could be more magnificently spoken of any sacrament ? Therefore, they that make a 
real difference between the sacraments of the Old Testament and ours, never seem to 
have known how far Christ's office extendeth :" which he says, not to magnify the Old, 
but disgrace the New. 

(a) This is also the cause, why our first English translators corrupted this place in the 
Acts, to make no difference between John's baptism and Christ's, saying, " Unto what 
then were you baptized ? And they said, Unto John's baptism." Which Beza would 
have to be spoken of John's doctrine, and not of his baptism in water ; as if it had been 
said, "What doctrine do ye profess ?" and they said, "John's;" whereas, indeed, the 
question is, " In what then ?" or " Wherein were you baptized ?" and they said, " In 
John's baptism:" as if they would say, we have received John's baptism, but not the 
Holy Ghost, as yet ; whence immediately follows, " Then they were baptized in the 
name of Jesus f' and after imposition of hands, " The Holy Ghost came upon them 
whence appears, the insufficiency of John's baptism, and the great difference between 
it and Christ's. And this so much troubles the Bezites, that Beza himself expresses his 
grief in these words ; '-' It is not necessary, that wheresoever there is mention of John's 
baptism, we should think it the very ceremony of baptism : therefore they, who gather 
that John's baptism differs from Christ's, because these, a little after, are said to be bap- 
tized in the name of Jesus Christ, have no sure foundation ;" see his annotations in Acts 
19. Thus he endeavours to take away the foundation of this catholic conclusion — that 
John's baptism differs, and is far inferior to Christ's. 

Beza confesses, that the Greek u\ rl is often used for "wherein" or "wherewith;" as 
it is in the Vulgate Latin, and Erasmus ; but he, and his followers, think it signifies not 
so here ; though but the second verse after, (ver. 5.) the very same Greek phrase u\ to 
ovopx is by them translated " In ;" where they say, "That they were baptized in, not 
unto, the name Of Jesus Christ." 

(b) But no wonder, if they disgraced the baptism of Christ, when somef of them 
durst presume to take it quite away, by interpreting these words of the Gospel : " Un- 
less a man be born again of wa'ter, and the Spirit," &c. in this manner, " Unless a man 
be born again of water, that is, the Spirit ;" as if by water, in this place, were only meant 
the Spirit allegorically, and not material water : as though our Saviour had said to Ni- 
eodemus, "Unless a man be born again of water, I mean of the Spirit, he cannot enter 
into the kingdom of Heaven." To which purpose, Calvin as falsely translates the apos- 
tle's words to Titust thus : per lavacrum regenerationis Spiritus sancti, quod effud.it in nos 
abunde ; making the apostle say, " That God poured the water of regeneration upon us 
abundantly;" that is, "the Holy Ghost." And lest we should not understand him, he 
tells us, in his commentary on this place, " That the apostle, speaking of water poured 
out abundantly, speaks not of material water, but of the Holy Ghost :" whereas the 
apostle makes not "Water" and the " Holy Ghost" all one ; but most plainly distin- 
guishes them ; not saying, that " Water" was poured out upon us, as they would infer, 
by translating it " Which he shed; 1 ' but the " Holy Ghost," whom " he hath poured out 
upon us abundantly ;" so that here is meant both the material water, or washing of bap- 
tism, and the effect thereof, which is, the Holy Ghost poured out upon us. 

But, if I blame our English translators, in this place, for making it indifferent, either 
" Which fountain," or " Which Holy Ghost he shed," &c. they will tell me, that the 
Greek is also indifferent : but, if we demand of them, whether the Holy Ghost, or rather 
a fountain of water, may be said to be shed, they must doubtless confess, not the Holy 
Ghost, but water : and consequently, their translating " Which he shed," instead of 
" Whom he poured out," would have it denote the "Fountain of water;" thereby agree- 
ing with Calvin's Translation, and Beza's Commentary; for Beza, in his translation, re- 
fers it to the Holy Ghost, as Catholics do. 

* 25th of the 39 Articles, f Beza in 4. Jo. ver. 10. & in Tit. c. 3. ver. 5. * Calvin's 
Translation in Tit, cap. 3. v. 5. 



56 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Confiternini 
l%of&o\oyi7<rQri ergo 
alter utrum pecca- 
ta vestra. 



(6) Si in Tyro 
& Sidotie factce es- 
sent virtutes, qux 
factce sunt in vobis, 
olijn in cilicio & ci- 
nere poenitentiam 
e g'isse n t,/L6t t e voWa v . 



Poenitentiam a- 
gite, appropinqua- 
bit enim liegnum 
Cot lorum. 



Predicans bap- 
tismum pceniten- 
tiae. 



Facite ergofruc- 
tus dignos peniten- 
tial. 



Petvus vero ad 
illos poenitentiam 
(inquit) agite, & 
baptizetur unus- 
quisque vestrum in 
nomine Jesu Chris- 
ti. ' 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



'Confess/ there- 
fore, your 1 sins' 
one to another. 



— If in Tyre and 
Sidon • had been 
wrought the mira- 
cles that have 
been done in you, 
' They had done 
penance' in sack- 
cloth and ashes, 
long ere now. 



' Do penance,' 
for the kingdom 
of Heaven is at 
hand. 



— Preaching 
the baptism of 
' penance.' 



Yield, therefore, 
fruits worthy of 
' penance.' 



15 ut Peter said 
to them, * do pe- 
nance,' and be 
every one of you 
baptized in the 
name of Jesus 
Christ. 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) ' Acknow- 
ledge your ' faults' 
one to another. 



(b) — Beza in 
all his translations 
has, ' they had 
amended their 
lives.' And our 
other translations 
say, ' they would 
have repented.' 



' Repent,' for 
the kingdom of 
Heaven is at hand. 



Preaching the 
baptism of * re- 
pentance.' 



— Worthy of 
' repentance.' Be- 
za says, * Do fruits 
meet for them that 
amend their lives.' 



— ' Repent,' and 
be every one of 
you baptized, &c. 



The last trans- 
lation of the 
protestant Bi- 
ble, edit. Lon- 
don, an. 1683. 



Confess your 
faults, &c. 



— Instead of 
' They had done 
penance,' they 
say, ' They 
would have re- 
pented.' 



Repent, &c. 



" Preaching the 
baptism of * re- 
pentance.' 



Fruit 

worthy of * re- 



pentance. 



— 'Repent,' 
and be baptized, 
&c. 



CONFESSION AND THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE, 



37 



(a) To avoid this term, " confession," especially in this place, whence the reader 
might easily gather " sacramental confession," they thus falsify the text. It is said a little 
before, " If any be sick, let him bring in the priests," &c. And then it follows, " Confess 
your sins," &c. But they, to make sure work, say, acknowledge, instead of confess ; and 
for priests, " elders ;" and for sins, they had rather say faults ; " acknowledge your 
faults," to make it sound among the ignorant common people, as different as they can 
from the usual catholic phrase, " Confess your sins." What mean they by this ? If this 
acknowleding of faults one to another, before death, be indifferently made to all men, 
why do they appoint in their common-prayer book,* (as it seems, out of this place,) that 
the sick person shall make a special confession to the minister ; and he shall absolve him 
in the very same form of absolution that catholic priests use in the sacrament of penance ? 
— And again, seeing themselves acknowledge forgiveness of sins by the minister, why 
do they not reckon penance, of which confession is a part, amongst the sacraments ? But, 
I suppose, when they translated their Bibles, they were of the same judgment with the 
ministers of the diocese of Lincoln,f who petitioned to have the words of absolution 
blotted out of the common-prayer book : but when they visit the sick, they are of the 
judgment of Roman catholics, who, at this day, hold confession and absolution necessary 
to salvation, as did also the primitive Christians : witness St. Basil ; " Sins must neces- 
sarily be opened unto those, to whom the dispensations of God's mysteries is committed." 
St. Ambrose, " If thou desirest to be justified, confess thy sin ; for a sincere confession 
of sins dissolves the knot of iniquity.'^ 

(b) As for penance, and satisfaction for sins, they utterly deny it, upon the heresy of, 
" Only faith justifying and saving a man." Beza protests, that he avoids these terms, 
iJLilxvoia, pcenitentia, and ^avoEm, pcenitentiam agite, of purpose : and says, that in trans- 
lating these Greek words, he will always use, resipiscentia and resipiscite, " amendment 
of life," and " amend your lives." And our English Bibles, to this day, dare not venture 
on the word penance, but only repentance ; which is not only far different from the 
Greek word, but even from the very circumstances of the text ; as is evident from those 
of St. Math. 11. and Luke 10. where these words, " sack-cloth and ashes," cannot but 
signify more than the word repentance, or amendment of life can denote ; as is plain 
from these words of St. Basil, § " Sack-cloth makes for penance ; for the fathers, in old 
time, sitting in sack-cloth and ashes, did penance." Do not St. John Baptist, and St. 
Paul, plainly signify penitential works, when they exhort us to " do fruits worthy of pen- 
ance ?" which penance St. Augustine thus declares, " There is a more grievous and 
more mournful penance, whereby properly they are called in the church, that are peni- 
tents ; removed also from partaking the sacrament of the altar." And Sozomen, in his 
Ecclesiastical History, says, " In the church of Rome, there is a manifest and known 
place for the penitents, and in it they stand sorrowful, and as it were mourning, and when 
the sacrifice is ended, being not made partakers thereof, with weeping and lamentations 
they cast themselves far on the ground : then the bishop, weeping also with compassion, 
lifts them up ; and, after a certain time enjoined, absolves them from their penance. 
This the priests or bishops of Rome keep, from the very beginning, even until our time." 

Not only Sozomen, but Socrates|| also, and all the ancient fathers, when they speak of 
penitents, that confessed and lamented their sins, and were enjoined penance, and per- 
formed it, did always express it in the said Greek words ; which, therefore, are proved 
most evidently to signify penance, and doing penance. Again, when the ancient coun- 
cil of Laodiceaf says, that the time of penance should be given to offenders, according 
to the proportion of the fault : and that such shall not communicate till a certain time ; 
but after they have done penance, and confessed their fault,** are then to be received : 
and when the first council of Nice speaks of shortening or prolonging the days of pen- 
ance : when St. Basilff speaks after the same manner : when St. Chrysostom calls the 
sack-cloth and fasting of the Ninevites, for certain days, " Tot dierum pcenitentiam^ so 
many days of penance :" in all these places I would demand of our translators of the 
English Bible, if all these speeches of penance, and doing penance, are not expressed 
by the said Greek words ? and I would ask them, whether in these places, where there 
is mentioned a prescribed time of satisfaction for sin, by such and such penal means,, 
they will translate repentance and amendment of life only ? — Moreover, the Latin church,, 
and" all the ancient fathers thereof, have always read, as the Vulgate Latin interpreter 
translates, and do all expound the same penance, and doing penance : for example, see 
St. Augustine, among others \%\ where you will find it plain, that he speaks of painful 
or " penitential works, for satisfaction of sins/' 

* Visitation of the sick. f Survey of the Common-prayer Book. % St. Basil, in 
regulis brevior. Interrogatione " 288. St. Amb. lib. de pxnit. cap. 6. § St. Basil in Psalm 
29, St. Aug. Horn. 27. Inter. 50. H. & Ep. 108. Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 16. See St. Hierom. 
in Epitaph. Fabiol. || Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 19. If Council of Laodicea, Can. 2, 9, & 19. 
** 1 Council of Nice. Can. 12. ff St. Basil, cap. 1. ad Amphiloch. n St. Aug. Ep. 108, 



38 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST THE 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Ver. 



St. Luke, 
chapt. 1. 
verse 28. 



St. Matth. 
chapt. 1. 
verse 25. 



Genesis, 
chapt. 3. 
verse 15. 



2 St. Peter, 
chapt. 1. 
verse 15. 



Psalm 138. 
Eng. Bible, 
139. verse 
17. 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Ave, gratia 
plena, Dominus te- 
cum XE^apJTtf/ttSV^. 



(b) Et vocavit 
nomen ejus Jesum, 
xat iHctKicrz to ovo/ta 
ccutu Ittcruv. 



(c) Ipsa conteret 
caput tuum, et tu 
insidiaberis calca- 
neo ejus. 



(d) Dabo aatem 
operam et f requen- 
ter habere vos post 
obitum meum, ut 
horum memoriam 
faciatis. 



(e) Nimis hono- 
rificati sunt amici 
tiii, yys ot <$>ikoi c-h. 
Deus nimis con- 
fortatus est princi- 
patus eorum sn^NT 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



Hail, full of 
grace, our Lord is 
with thee. 



And ' called' his 
name Jesus. 



She shall bruise 
thy head in pieces, 
and thou shalt 'lie 
in wait for her 
heel.' 



And I will do my 
endeavour ; jou to 
have often after 
my decease also, 
that you may keep 
a memory of these 
things. 



Thy friends, O 
God, are become 
exceedingly hon- 
ourable ; their 
princedom is ex- 
ceedingly 
strengthened. 



Corruptions in the 
Protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) Hail, thou 
that art freely be- 
loved. In Bible, 
1577. Thou that 
art in high favour. 



(b) And 'he' 
called his name 
Jesus. 



(c) It shall 
bruise thy head, 
and thou shalt 
' bruise his heel. 5 



(d) I will en- 
deavour that you 
may be able, after 
my decease, to 
have these things 
' always in re- 
membrance.' 



(e) How dear 
are thy councils 
(or thoughts) to 
me? O ! how great 
is the sum of 
them ? 



The last trans- 
lation of the 
Protestant Bi- 
ble, Edit. Lon- 
don,annol683. 



In Bible, 1637. 
Hail, thou that 
art highly fa- 
voured. In Bi- 
ble, 1683. Hail, 
thou that art 
highly favoured, 
our Lord is with 
thee. 



And « he' call- 
ed his name Je- 
sus. 



It shall bruise 
thy head, and 
thou shalt 
' bruise his heel/ 



I will endea- 
vour, that you 
may be able af- 
ter my decease, 
to haye these 
things always in 
' remembrance.* 



How precious 
also are thy 
thoughts unto 
me, O God ! 
How great is 
the sum of them I 



HONOUR OF OUR BLESSED LADY AND OTHER SAINTS, 



39 



(a) The most B. Virgin, and glorious Mother of Christ, has by God's holy church always been 
honoured with most magnificent titles and addresses : one of the first four general councils 
gives her the transcendant title of the Mother of God.* And by St. Cyril of Alexandria, she 
is saluted in these words, " Hail ! holy Mother of God, rich Treasure of the world, ever- 
shining Lamp, Crown of purity, and Sceptre of true doctrine ; by thee the holy Trinity is every 
where blessed and adored, the Heavens exult, angels rejoice, and devils are chased from us : 
who so surpasses in eloquence, as to be able to say enough to the glory of Mary ?" Yea, the 
angel Gabriel is commissioned from God to address himself to her with this salutation, " Hail ! 
full of grace :" f since which time, what has ever been more common, and, at this day, more 
general and useful in all Christian countries, than in the Ave Maria to say, Gratia Plena, " Full 
of grace ?" But, in our miserable land, the Holy Prayer, which every child used to say, is not 
only banished, but the very text of Scripture wherein our blessed Lady was saluted by the 
angel, " Hail ! full of grace," they have changed into another manner of salutation, viz. " Hail 
thou that art freely beloved," or, " in high favour."* I would gladly know from them, why 
this, or that, or any other thing, rather than " Hail ! full of grace V St. John Baptist was full 
of the Holy Ghost, even from his birth ; St. Stephen was full of grace ;§ why may not then our 
Lady be called " full of grace," who, as St. Ambrose says, •« only obtained the grace which no 
other woman deserved, to be replenished with the Author of grace?" 

If they say, the Greek word does not signify so : 1 must ask them, why they translate »xxo- 
/ttEv(^,|| ulcerosvs, " full of sores," and will not translate KE^a^c^'v)?, gratiosa, "full of grace?" 
Let them tell us what difference there is in the nature and significancy of these two words, 
If ulcerosus, as Beza translates it, be "full of sores," why is not gratiosa, as Erasmus translates 
it, " full of grace ?" seeing that all such adjectives in osus signify fulness, as periculosus, arum- 
nosus, &c. as every school-boy knows. What syllable is there in this word, that seems to make 
it signify " freely beloved ?" St. Chrysostom, and the Greek doctors, who should best know 
the nature of this Greek word, say, that it signifies to make gracious and acceptable. St. Atha- 
nasius, a Greek doctor, says, that our blessed Lady had this title, Ki<xxpi1uiu.ivY), because the Holy 
Ghost descended into her, filling her with all graces and virtues. And St. Hierom reads gratia 
/>ferca, and says plainly, she was so saluted, " full of grace," because she conceived him in whom 
all fulness of the Deity dwelt corporally.^ 

(b) Again, to take from the holy Mother of God, what honour they can, they translate, that 
" He, (v!z. Joseph) called his name Jesus." And why not she as well as he ? For in St. Luke, 
the angel saith to our Lady also, " Thou shalt call his name Jesus." Have we not much more 
reason to think that the B. Virgin, the natural mother of our Saviour, gave him the name Jesus, 
than Joseph, his reputed father ; seeing also St. Matthew, in this place, limits it neither to him 
nor her ? And the angel revealed the name first unto her, saying, that she should call him. 
And the Hebrew word, Isa. 7. whereunto the angel alludes, is of the feminine gender; and by 
the great rabbins referred unto her, saying expressly, in their commentaries, et vocabit ipsa 
puella, &c. " And the Maid herself shall call his name Jesus."** 

(c) How ready our new controllers of antiquity, and the approved ancient Latin transla- 
tion, are to find fault with this text, Gen. 3. " She shall bruise the head," &c. because it ap- 
pertains to our blessed Lady's honour ; saying, that all ancient fathers read ipsum :f\ when on 
the contrary, St. Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Gregory, St. Bede, St. Bernard, 
and many others, read ipsa, as the Latin text now does. And though some have read otherwise, 
yet, whether we read " she" shall bruise, or " her seed," that is, her Son, Jesus Christ, we 
attribute no more, or no less to Christ, Or to his mother, by this reading or by that ; as you may 
see, if you please to read the annotations upon this place in the Doway Bible. I have spoken 
of this in the Preface. 

(d) Where the Scripture, in the original, is ambiguous and indifferent to divers senses, it 
ought not to be restrained or limited by translation, unless there be a mere necessity, when it 
can hardly express the ambiguity of the original : as for example, in this where St. Peter speaks 
so ambiguously, either that he will remember them after his death, or that they shall remember 
him. But the Calvinists restrain the sense of this place, without any necessity ; and that against 
the prayer and intercession of saints for us, contrary to the judgment of some of the Greek 
fathers ; who concluded from it, " That the saints in Heaven remember us on earth, and make 
intercession for us." 

(e) In fine, this verse of the Psalms,** which is by the church and all antiquity read thus, 
and both sung and said in honour of the holy apostles, agreeably to that in another Psalm, 
" Thou shalt appoint them princes over all the earth," they translate contrary hoth to the He- 
brew and the Greek, which is altogether according to the said ancient Latin translation, "How 
are the heads of them strengthened, or their princedoms :" And this they do, purposely to 
detract from the honour of the apostles and holy saints. 

* Cone. Eph. cap. 13. f St. Luke 1. v. 18. * St. Luke 1. v. 15. § Act. 7. ver. 8. || Luke 
16. ver. 20. t St. Chrys. Comment, in Ep. 1. St. Athan. de S. Deipar. St. Hierom. in Ep. 140 
in Expos. Psal. 44. ** Rabbi Abraham, & Rabbi David. ff See the annotations upon this 
place in the Doway Bible. ** Oecum. in Caten. Gagneius in nunc locum. Psal. 44, 



40 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



Text. 



(a) Fide, Jacob 
moriens singulos ji- 
liorum Joseph be- 
ne dixit, & adora- 
vit fastigium virgae 
ejus. -GTpocrfxtivwcnv 
ect< to axpov jr)i pet/3- 
Ja aurS. 



(b) Adoravit Is- 
rael Deum, conver- 
susad lectuli caput. 
rrJDswNv'vinntP' 



Exaltate Domi- 
mtmDeum nostmm, 
& adorate scabel- 
lum pedum ejus, 
quoniam sanctum 
est. 



Tntroibimus in 
tabernaculum ejus, 
adorabimus in lo- 
co, ubi steterunt 
pedes ejus. 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



By faith, Jacob 
dying, blessed e- 
very one of the 
sons of Joseph, 
and ' adored the 
top of his rod.' 



Israel adored 
God, turning to 
the bed's head. 



Exalt the Lord 
our God, * And 
adore ye the foot- 
stool of his feet/ 
because it is holy. 



We will enter 
into his taberna- 
cle, we will * a- 
dore in the place 
where his feet 
stood.' 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 

1579. 



(a) — And lean- 
ing on the end of 
his staff, worship- 
ped God. 



(b) Israel ' wor- 
shipped' God * to- 
wards' the bed's 
head. 



Exalt the Lord 
our God, and * Fall 
down before' his 
foot-stool, 1 For he' 
is holy. 



r We will 

' Fall down before 
his foot-stool.' 



The last transla- 
tion of the pro- 
testant Bible, 
edit. London, 
anno. 1683. 



By faith Ja- 
cob, when he 
was a dying, 
blessed both the 
sons of Joseph, 
* And worship- 
ped, leaning up- 
on the top of 
his staff.' 



And Israel 
' Bowed himself 
upon' the bed's 
head. 



Exalt the Lord 
our God, and 
* Worship at his 
foot-stool, for 
he' is holy. 



We will go 
into his taber- 
nacles, we will 
« Worship at his 
foot-stool.' 



THE DISTINCTION OF RELATIVE AND DIVINE WORSHIP. 



41 



(a) The sacred council of Trent decrees, that " the images of Christ, of the Virgin 
Mother of God, and of other saints, are to be had and retained, especially in churches; 
and that due honour and worship is to be imparted unto them : not that any divinity is 
believed to be in them ; or virtue, for which they are to be worshipped ; or that any 
thing is to be begged of them ; or that hope is to be put in them ; as, in times past, the 
pagans did, who put their trust in idols ; but because the honour which is exhibited to 
them, is referred to the archetype, which they resemble : so that, by the images which 
we kiss, and before which we uncover our heads, and kneel, we adore Christ and his 
Saints, whose likeness they bear.* And the second council of Nice, which confirmed the 
ancient reverence due to sacred images, tells us, " That these images the faithful salute 
with a kiss, and give an honoraryworship to them, but not the true Latria, or Divine 
"Worship, which is according to faith, and can be given to none but to God himselff 
Between which degrees of worship, Latria et Bulia, protestants are so loth to make any 
distinction, that, in this place, they restrain the Scripture to the sense of one doctor ; 
insomuch that they make the commentary of St. Augustine, (peculiar to him alone) the 
very text of Scripture, in their translation ; thereby excluding all other senses and ex- 
positions of other fathers ; who either read and expound, that " Jacob adored the top of 
Joseph's sceptre;" or else, that " he adored towards the top of his sceptre besides 
which two meanings, there is no other interpretation of this place,, in all antiquity, but 
in St. Augustine only, as Beza himself confesses. And here they add two words more 
than are in the Greek text, " Leaning and God :" forcing uvtov to signify avrov, which 
may be, but is as rare as virg<e ejus, for virgx sua ; and turning the other words clear 
out of their order, place, and form of construction, which they must needs have corres- 
pondent and answerable to the Hebrew text, from whence they were translated ; which 
Hebrew words themselves translate in this order, " He worshipped towards the bed's- 
head ;" and if so, according to the Hebrew, then did he worship " towards the top of 
his sceptre," according to the Greek ; the difference of both being only in these words, 
sceptre and bed ; because the Hebrew is ambiguous as to both, and not in the order and 
construction of the sentence. 

(b) But why is it, that they thus boldly add in one place, and take away in another ? 
Why do they add " leaned and God" in one text, and totally suppress " worshipped 
God" in another ? Is it not because they are afraid, lest those expressions might war- 
rant and confirm the catholic and Christian manner of adoring our Saviour Christ, to- 
wards the holy cross, or before his imag'e, the crucifix, the altar, &.c. ? And though s they 
make so much of the Greek particle, t-cn, as to translate it " leaning upon" rather than 
" towards ;" yet the ancient Greek fathers^ considered it of such little import, that they 
expounded and read the text, as if it were for the phrase only, and not for any significa- 
tion at all ; saying, " Jacob adored Joseph's sceptre ; the people of Israel adored the 
temple, the ark, the holy mount, the place where his feet stood," and the like : whereby 
St. Damascene proves the adoration of creatures, named dulia ; to wit, of the cross, and 
of sacred images. If, 1 say, these fathers make so little force of the prepositions, as to 
infer from these texts, not only adoration " towards the thing," but adoration of " the 
thing;" how come these, our new translators, thus to strain and rack the little particle, 
wi, to make it signify " leaning upon," and utterly to exclude it from signifying any 
thing tending towards adoration I 

1 would gladly know of them, whether in these places of the Psalms there be any 
force in the Hebrew prepositions? surely no more than if we should say in English, 
without prepositions, " Adore ye his holy hill : we will adore the place where his feet 
stood : adore ye his foot-stool ;" for they know the same preposition is used also, when 
it is said, " Adore ye our Lord ;" or, as themselves translate it, " Worship the Lord ; M 
where there can be no force nor signification of the preposition : and, therefore, in these 
places, their translation is corrupt and wilful ; when they say, " We will fall down be- 
fore," or, " at his foot-stool," &c. Where they shun and avoid, first, the term of adora- 
tion, t which the Hebrew and Greek duly express, by terms correspondent in both lan- 
guages throughout the Bible, and are applied, for the most part, to signify adoring of 
creatures. Secondly, they avoid the Greek phrase, which is, at least, to adore " to- 
wards" these holy things and places : and much more the Hebrew phrase, which is, to 
adore the very things rehearsed. " To adore God's foot-stool," as the psalmist saith, 
" because it is holy," or, " because he is holy," whose foot-stool it is, as the Greek 
readeth. And St. Augustine so precisely and religiously reads, " Adore ye his foot- 
stool," that he examines the case ; and finds, thereby, that the blessed sacrament must 
be adored, and that no good Christian takes it, before he adores it. 

* Council Trident, sess. 25. 
f 2 Concil. Nicen. Act. 7. 

v St. Chrys, Cecum in Collection, St. Damage, lib. 1, pro imaginib, Leont. apud Damas, 

6 



m 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, I The Vulgate Latin 
Chapter, [ Text, 
and Ver, 



The true English I Corruptions in the 
according to the | protestant Bi- 



Rhemish 
lation. 



trans- 



(a) Et arva- And ava- 

ritiam, qu<e est rice, which is the 

simulacrovum ser- service of idols. 
vitus, :iSa\oKctTpuci. 



Ant ava- 

rzis, quod est ido- 
lor urn servitus. 



(b) Quis autem 
consensus templo 
Dei cum ido lis ? 
ttSu\av. 



Filioli, cuStodite 
vos a simulacris, 
ttSa\av. 



Neque idololatroz 
£ifa\o*.a.Tpxi, effici- 
amini, sicut qui- 
dam ex ipsis. 



Or covet- 
ous person, which 
is the service of 
idols. 



bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



The last transit 
tion of the pro- 
testant Bible, 
Edit. London, 
anno 1683. 



(a) — And co- 
vetousness, which 
is the worshipping 
of images. 



And what a- 
greement hath the 
temple of God 
with idols? 



My little chil- 
dren, keep your- 
selveairom idols. 



Neither become 
ye idolaters, as 
certain of them. 



Or cove 

tous man, which is 
a worshipper of 
images. 



(i)How agreeth 
the temple of God 
with images? 



Babes, keep 
yourselves from 
images. 



And co- 

vetousness, 
which is idolatry. 



Corrected, 



Corrected. 



Corrected, 



Be not worship- 
pers of images, as 
some of them. 



Corrected akc 
in this. 



SACRED IMAGES. 



43 



(a) Before I proceed in this, let me ask our English translators, what is the most 
proper, and best English of eiSaxav, uSaKoxarpyis, uSuKoXarpua; idolum, idolatra, idololatria? 
Is it not idol, idolater, idolatry ? Are not these plain English words, and well known in 
our language ? Why then need they put three words for one, " Worshipper of images," 
and " Worshipping of images ?" Whether is the more natural and convenient speech, 
either in our English tongue, or for the truth of the thing to say, as the Holy Scripture 
does, " Covetousness is idolatry and consequently, " the covetous man is an idolater ;" 
or to say, as their first absurd translations have it, " Covetousness is worshipping of 
images," and the " covetous man is a worshipper of images ?" I suppose they will 
scarcely deny, but that there are many covetous protestants, and, perhaps, of their clergy 
too, that may be put in the list with those of whom the apostle speaks, when he says, 
there are some " whose belly is their God :" and though these make an idol of their 
money and their bellies, by covetousness and gluttony, yet they would doubtless take it 
ill from us, if in their own Scripture language, we should call them " worshippers of 
images." Who sees not, therefore, what great difference there is between " idol" and 
" image," " idolatry," and " worshipping of images ?" Even so much is there between 
St, Paul's words, and the protestant translation ; but because in their latter translations 
they have corrected this shameful absurdity, I will say no more of it. 

{b) In this other, not only their malice, but their full intent and set purpose of de- 
luding the poor simple people appear; this translation being made, when images were 
phickmg down throughout England, to create in the people a belief, that the apostle 
spoke against sacred images in churches ; whereas his words are against the idols and 
idolatry of the Gentiles ; as is plain from what goes before, exhorting them not to join 
with infidels ; for, says he, " How agreeth the temple of God with idols ?" not " with 
images," for " images" might be had without sin, as we see the Jews had the images 
of the cherubims, and the figures of oxen in the temple, and the image of the brazen 
serpent in the wilderness, by God's appointment ; though, as soon as they began to make 
an idol of the serpent, and adore it as their God, it could no longer be kept without sin. 
By this corrupt custom of translating image, instead of idol, they so bewitched their 
deceived followers, as to make them despise, contemn, and abandon even the very sign 
and image of salvation, the cross of Christ, and the crucifix; whereby the manner of his 
bitler death and passion is represented; notwithstanding their signing and marking their 
children with it in their baptism, when they are first made Christians. 

By such wilful corruptions, in these and other texts, as, " Be not worshippers of 
images, as some of them ;" and, " Babes, keep yourselves from images ;" which, the 
more to impress on the minds of the rulgar, they wrote upon their church walls ; the 
people were animated to break down, and cast out of their churches, the image of our 
blessed Saviour, his blessed mother, the twelve apostles, &c. with so full and general a 
resolution of defacing and extirpating all tokens or marks of our Saviour's passion, that 
they broke down the very crosses from the tops of church steeples, where they could 
easily come to them. And though, in their latter translations, they have corrected this 
corruption ; yet do some of the people so freshly, to this day, retain the malice impressed 
by it upon their parents, that they have presumed to break the cross lately set on the 
pinnacle of the porch of Westminster Abbey : And the more to show their spite towards 
that sacred sign of our redemption, the holy cross, placed it, not long since, upon the 
foreheads of bulls and mastiff dogs, and so drove them through the streets of London, to 
the eternal shame of such as receive it in their baptism, and pretend to Christianity. 
What could Jews or infidels have done more ? Was it not enough to break it down from 
the tops of churches, and to put up the image of a dragon, (the figure wherein the devil 
himself is usually represented,) as on Bow church,* in the midst of the city, but they 
must place it so contemptuously on the foreheads of their beasts and dogs? 

In how great esteem the holy cross was had by primitive Christians, the fathers of 
those days have sufficiently testified in their writings : " This cross," says St. Chrysos- 
tom, " we may see solemnly used in houses, in the market, in the desert, in the ways, 
on mountains and hills, in valleys," &c. contrary to which, the pretended reformers of 
our times have not only cast it out of their houses, but out of their churches also : They 
have broken it down from all market places, from hills, mountains, valleys, and high- 
ways ; so that in all the roads in England there is not one cross left standing entire, that 
I have ever heard of, except one called Ralph cross, which I have often seen, upon a 
wjld heath or mountain, near Danby Forest,in the North Riding of Yorkshire.f 

* Why might not a cock (the animal by which our Saviour was pleased to admonish 
St. Peter of his sins) have been placed upon Covent Garden church, rather than a ser- 
pent ? or a cross on Bow church rather than a dragon ? 

f The inhabitants of Danby, Rosdale, Westerdale, and Ferndale, may glory before all 
parts of England, that they haye a cross standing to this day in the midst of them. 



44 



PROTESTANT translations against the 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a J Scripsi vobis 
in epistola, ne com- 
misceaminifd rnica- 
riis, noniitique for- 
nicariis hujus mun- 
di, aut avaris, aut 
rapacibus, aut ido- 
lis servientibus, 
ufuXoXccTpais, ah- 
oquin debueratis 
de hoc mundo exi- 
isse : nunc autem 
scripsi vobis non 
commisceri si is 
qui f rater nomina- 
tur, est fornicator, 
aut avails, aut 
iclolis serviens, &.c. 

uSuKoKXTpXIi . 



fbj Jleliqui 
mihi septem millia 
virorwn qui non 
curvaverunt genua 
ante Baal. 



Viri Ephesi, 
quis enim est liomi- 
num, qui nesciat 
Ephesiorum civita- 
tem cult rice m esse 
Magna JJiatice & 
Jovis proiis ? t3 



JVon fades tibi 
sculptile, hsa i'lSa- 



The true English 
according 1 to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



I wrote to you 
in an epistle, not 
to keep company 
with fornicators; I 
mean, not the for- 
nicators of this 
world, or the co- 
vetous, or the ex- 
tortioners, or 
' servers of idols;' 
otherwise you 
should have gone 
out of this world. 

But now I have 
writ to you, not to 
keep company ; if 
he that is named a 
brother be a for- 
nicator or covet- 
ous person, or a 
1 server of idols,' 
&c. 

I have left me 
seven thousand 
men that have not 
bowed their knees 
to Baal. 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



Ye men of E- 
phesus, for what 
man is there that 
knoweth not the 
city of the Ephe- 
sians, to be a wor- 
shipper of great 
Diana, and Jupi- 
ter's « Child ?' 



Thou shalt not 
make to thyself 
any graven 'thing.' 



(a) I wrote -*I.o 
you * that you 
should' not com- 
pany with forni- 
cators : * And' I 
' meant' not ' all 
of the fornicators 
of this world, 'ei- 
ther of the covet- 
ous, or extortion- 
ers, ' either the 
idolaters,' &c. 

But « that ye' 
company not • to- 
gether;' if * any' 
that is * called' a 
brother, be a for- 
nicator, or covet- 
ous, or a " wor- 
shipper' of ' im- 
ages,' &c. 



(b) I have left 
me seven thousand 
men that have not 
bowed their knees 
to * the image of 
Baal. 



Instead of ' Ju- 
piter's child,' they 
translate ' the im- 
age which came 
down from Jupi- 
ter.' 



The last Trans- 
lation of the 
protestant Bi- 
ble, edit. Lon- 
don, an. 1683. 



Thou shalt not 
make to thyself 
any graven 
' image. 5 



It is corrected 
in this Bible, 



I have left 
me seven thou- 
sand men that 
have not bowed 
their knees to 
the * image' of 
Baal. 



And here they 
translate * the 
image which fell 
down from Ju- 
piter.* 



Thou shalt not 
make to thee 
any * graven 
image.' 



USE OF SACE.ED IMAGES. 



45 



(a) How malicious and heretical was their intention, who, in this one sentence, made St. Paul 
seem to speak two distinct thing's, calling the pagans " Idolaters," and such wicked Christians 
as should commit the same impiety, " Worshippers of images ;" whereas the apostle uses but 
one and the self-same Greek word, in speaking both of pagans and Christians ? it is a wilful and 
most notorious corruption ; for, in the first place, the translators, speaking of pagans, render 
the word in the text, " Idolater but in the latter part of the verse, speaking of Christians, 
they translate the very same Greek word, " Worshipper of images ;" and what reason had they 
for this, but to make the simple and ignorant reader think, that St. Paul speaks here not only 
of pagan idolaters, but also of cathblic Christians, who reverently kneel in prayer before the 
holy cross, or images of our Saviour Christ and his saints ; as though the apostle had command- 
ed such to be avoided ? all the other words, covetous, fornicators, extortioners, they translate 
alike, in both places, with reference both to pagans and Christians : yet the word " idolaters" 
not so, but pagans they call " idolaters," and Christians, " Worshippers of images." Was not 
this done on purpose, to make both seem alike, and to intimate that Christians doing reverence 
before sacred images, (which protestants call worshipping of images) are more to be avoided 
than the pagan idolaters ? whereas the apostle, speaking of pagans and Christians that commit- 
ted one and the self-same heinous sin, commands the Christian in that case to be avoided for 
his amendment, leaving the pagan to himself, and to God, as not caring to judge him. 

(6) Besides their falsely translating " image" instead of " idol," the} 7 have also another way 
of falsifying and corrupting the Scripture, by introducing the word " image" into the text, when, 
in the Hebrew or Greek, there is no such thing ; as in these notorious examples " To the 
image of Baal : the image that came down from Jupiter :" where they are not content to under- 
stand " image" rather than " idol," but they must intrude it into the text, though they know 
full well it is not in the Greek. 

Not unlike this kind of falsification, is that which has crept as a leprosy through all their Bi- 
bles, and which, it seems, they are resolved never to correct, viz. their translating sculptile and 
conflatile, graven image, and molten image ; namely, in the first commandment ; where they 
cannot be ignorant, that in the Greek it is " idol," and in the Hebrew, such a word as signifies 
only a " graven thing," not including this word " image." They know that God commanded 
to make the images of cherubins, and of oxen, in the temple, and of the brazen serpent in the 
desert ; and therefore their wisdoms might have considered, that he forbad not all graven 
images, but such as the Gentiles made, and worshipped for Gods ; and therefore, non fades tibi 
sculptile, coincide with those words that go before, " Thou shalt have no other Gods but me." 
For so to have an image, as to make it a God, is to make it more than an image : and therefore 
when it is an idol, as were the idols of the Gentiles, then it is forbidden by this commandment. 
Otherwise, when the cross stood many years upon tli£ table, in queen Elizabeth's chapel, pray 
was it against this commandment ? or was it idolatry in her majesty, and her counsellors, that 
appointed it there ? or do their brethren the Lutherans beyond seas, at this day, commit idola- 
try against this commandment, who have in their churches the crucifix, and the holy images of 
the mother of God, and of St. John the Evangelist? or if the whole story of the Gospel con- 
cerning our Saviour Christ, were drawn in pictures and images in their churches, as it is in ma- 
ny of ours, would they say, it were a breach of this commandment? Fie for shame! fie for 
shame ! that they should with such intolerable impudence and deceit abuse and bewitch the ig- 
norant people against their own knowledge and consciences. « 

For do they not know, that God many times forbad the Jews either to marry or converse 
with the Gentiles, lest they might fall to worship their idols, as Solomon did, and as the psalm 
reports of them ? this then is the meaning of the commandment, neither to make the idols of 
the Gentiles, nor any other, either like them, or as Jeroboam did in Dan and Bethel.* By this 
commandment we are forbidden, (not to make images, but) to make idols, or to worship images, 
or any thing else, as God. " I do not," says St. Jo. Damascene, " worship an image as God ; 
but by the images and saints I give honour and adoration to God ; for whose sake I respect and 
reverence those that are his friends."f "All over the world," says pope Adrian I. "whereso- 
ever Christianity is professed, sacred images are honoured by the faithful, &c. By the image 
of the body which the Son of God took for our redemption, we adore our Redeemer who is 
in Heaven; far be it from us, that we (as some calumniate) should make Gods of images: we 
only express the love and zeal we have for God, and his saints : and as we keep the books of 
the Holy Scripture, so do we the images, to remind us of our duty, still preserving entire the 
purity of our faith."* Learn from St. Jerom, after what manner they made use of holy images 
in his time ; he writes in the epitaph of Paula, " That she adored prostrate on the ground, be- 
fore the cross, as if she saw our Lord hanging on it." And in Jonas, chap. 4. he proves that 
out of the veneration and love they had for the apostles, they generally painted their images on 
the vessels, which are called saucomaries. And will protestants say, that this was idolatry ? 

* 3 Kings, chap. 12. v. 28. Psal. 105, v. 19. f St. Jo. Damas. Orat, 3. * Adrian I. Ponti£ 
Ep. ad Constan. & Irenas. Impp. 



46 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST THE 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Et contami- 
7iabis laininas 
sculptilium argenti 
tut, & vestimentum 
conflatilis auri tut, 
&c. 



Quid prodest 
sculptile, quia 
sculpsit Mud fictov 
suus c o?i flattie, & 
i7nagi7ie7n faham ? 

J TO %U\iVf/.X. 



(b) Quia non 
colo idola manuj "ac- 
ta, u$uK*. xtigots-Qt- 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



And thou shalt 
contaminate the 
plates of the sculp- 
tils of thy silver, 
and the garment 
of the molten of 
thy gold. 



What profilcth 
the thing engrav- 
en, that the forger 
thereof hath gra- 
ven it a molten, 
and a false image ? 



Because I wor- 
ship not idolsmade 
with hands. 



Corruptions in the 
protectant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) Ye shall de- 
file also the cover- 
ing of the graven 
images of silver, 
and the ornament 
of thy molten ima- 
ges of gold. 



What profiteth 
the image, for the 
maker thereof 
hath made it an 
image, and a teach- 
er of lies ? 



(b) I worship 
not things that be 
made with hands. 



The last trans- 
lation of the 
protestant Bi- 
ble, edit. Lon- 
don, an. 1683. 

In this also 
they translate 
graven and mol- 
ten images, in- 
stead of graven 
and molten 
things, or idols, 



What profit- 
eth the graven 
image, that the 
maker thereof 
hath graven it, 
the molten im- 
age, and a teach- 
er of lies ? 



Though they 
have corrected 
it, yet the two 
last chapters are 
omitted in their 
small impres- 
sions for Apo- 
crypha. 



tSE OF SACRED IMAGES. 



47 



(a) The two Hebrew words, Pesilim and Massechoth, which in the Latin signify 
Sculptilia and Confiatilia, they in their translation render into English by the word 
Images, neither word being Hebrew for an image : Thus, if one should ask, what is the 
Latin for an image, and they should tell him Sculptile : Whereupon he seeing a fair 
painted image on a table, might perhaps say, ecce egregium sculptile ; which, doubtless, 
every boy in the grammar-school would laugh at. And this I tell them, because I per- 
ceive their endeavour to make sculptile and image of the same import ; which is most 
evidently false, as to their great shame appears from these words of Habakkuk : Quid 
prodest sculptile ? 8cc. which, contrary to the Hebrew and Greek, they translate, " What 
profiteth the Image," &c. as you may see in the former page. 

I wish every common reader was able to discern their falsehood in this place : First, 
they make sculpere sculptile no more than " To make an image ;" which being absurd, 
as I have hinted, (because the painter or embroiderer making an image cannot be said 
sculpere sculptile) might teach them that the Hebrew has in it no signification of image f 
no more than sculpere can signify " To make an image." And therefore the Greek \v<r*Tw 
and the Latin sculptile, precisely, for the most part, express neither more nor less than 
a " thing graven ;" but yet mean always by these words, a " graven idol," to which sig- 
nification they are appropriated by use of holy Scripture ; as are also simulacrum, idolum, 
conjlatile, as sometimes imago : in which sense of signifying idols, if they did repeat 
images so often, although the translation were not precise ; yet it would be in some part 
tolerable, because the sense would be so ; but when they do it to bring all holy images 
into contempt, even the image of our Saviour Christ crucified, they may justly be con- 
trolled for false and heretical translators. — Conjlatile here also they falsely translate 
image, as they did before in Isaiah, and as they have done sculptile, though two different 
words ; and, as is said, each signifying a thing different from image. But where they 
should translate image, as, imaginem falsam, " A false image," they translate another 
thing, without any necessary pretence, either of Hebrew or Greek, clearly avoiding here 
the name of image, because this place tells them, that the holy Scripture speaketh 
against false images: or, as themselves translate, such images as teach lies, represent- 
ing fake gods, which are not. Idolum nihil est, as the apostle says, & non sunt Dii, qui 
manibus fiunt. Which distinction of false and true images, our protestant translators 
will not have, because they condemn all images, even holy and sacred also ; and there- 
fore make the holy Scriptures to speak herein according to their own fancies. What 
monstrous and intolerable deceit is this ! 

(b) Wherein they proceed so far, that when Daniel said to the king, " I worship not 
idols made with hands," they make him say, " I worship not things that be made with 
hands," leaving out the word idols altogether, as though he had said, nothing made 
with hands was to be adored, not the ark, nor the propitiatory, no, nor the holy cross 
itself, on which our Saviour shed his precious blood. As before they added to the text, 
so here they diminish and take from it as boldly as if there had never been a curse de- 
nounced against such manglers of holy Scripture. 

See you not, that it is not enough for them to corrupt and falsify the text, and to add 
and take away words and sentences at their pleasure, but their unparalleled presump- 
tion emboldens them to deprive the people of whole chapters and books, as the two last 
chapters of Daniel, and the rest which they call Apocrypha, which are quite left out in 
their new bibles. When all this is done, the poor simple people must be glad of this 
castrated bible, for their " only rule of faith." Vce! V<ef 

The reason they give for rejecting them is, as I told you above, " That they have for- 
merly been doubted of;" but if you demand, why they do not, for the same reason, reject 
a great many more in the New Testament ? the whole church of England answers you 
in Mr. Rogers's words, and by him, " How be it we judge them (viz. books formerly 
doubted of in the New Testament) canonical, not so much because learned and godly 
men in the church so have, and do receive and allow of them, as for that the holy Spirit 
in our hearts doth testify that they are from God." See Rogers's Defence of the Thirty- 
nine Articles, page 31, 32. So that protestants are purely beholden to the private 
spirit in the hearts of their convocation-men, for almost half the New Testament ; which 
had never been admitted by them in the canon of Scripture, if the said " private spirit 
in their hearts had not testified their being from God ;" no more than the rest called 
Apocrypha, which they not only thrust out of the Canon, but omit to publish in their 
smaller impressions of the Bible; because, forsooth, the holy private spirit in their 
hearts, testifies them to speak too expressly against their heretical doctrines, 



48 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Ver. 



Acts Apos 
chap. 2. 
ver. 27. 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Quo?iia?n 
non derelinques a- 
nimam meam in 
Inferno. 



(b) Desccndam 
ad filium meum lu- 
gens in Internum, 
^lNC, aJV Infer- 
nus ; for so are the 
Ilebveiv, Greek and 
Latin -words f 
Hell. 



Deducetis canos 
meos cum dulorc ad 
Inferos. 



Deducetis canos 
meos cum ma rare 
ad Inferos. 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans 
lation. 



Because thou 
wilt not leave my 
' soul in Hell.' 



I will go down 
to my son into 
1 Hell' mourning. 



You will bring 
down my grey 
hairs with sorrow 
unto ' Hell.' 



—With 
unto 1 Hell 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) Thou ' shalt' 
not leave my 
' Carcass in the 

grave.' 

Beza. 

Thou wilt not 
leave my soul in 
' the grave.' (Bib. 
1579. 



(b) I will go 
down into ' the 
grave unto' my 
son mourning. 



nstead of' Hell, 
they say * grave.' 



With sorrow un- 
to [ the grave.' 



— Ad Inferos. 



-Unto ' Hell. 



* To the crave.' 



The last transla- 
tion of the 
protestant Bi- 
ble, edit. Lon 
don, an. 1683 



It is corrected 
in this transla- 
tion. 



I will go dowji 
into the 'grave/ 



For ' Hell/ 
they also say, 
• grave.' 



With sorrow 
unto the 
'grave.' 



To the 



' crave. 



LIMBUS PAT RUM AND PURGATORY. 



4S 



The doctrine of our pretended reformers is, that " There was never, from the begin- 
ning of the world, any other place for souls, after this life, but only two, to wit, Heaven 
for the blessed, and Hell for the damned." This heretical doctrine includes many erro- 
neous branches : first, that all the holy patriarchs, prophets, and other holy men, of the 
Old Testament, went not into the third place, called Abraham's bosom, or limbics patrum,- 
but immediately to Heaven : that they were in Heaven before our blessed Saviour had 
suffered death for their redemption : whence it will follow, that our Saviour was not 
the first man that ascended, and entered into Heaven. Moreover, by this doctrine it 
will follow, that our Saviour Christ descended not into any third place, in our creed 
called Hell, to deliver the fathers of the Old Testament, and to bring them triumphantly 
with him into Heaven : and so, that article of the apostle's creed, concerning our Sa- 
viour's descent into Hell, must either be put out, as indeed it was by Beza in the Confes- 
sion of his Faith, printed anno 1564, or it must have some other meaning ; to wit, either 
the lying of the body in the grave, or, as Calvin and his followers will have it, the suffer- 
ing of Hell-torments, and pains upon the cross.* 

(<z) In defence or these erroneous doctrines, they most wilfully corrupt the Holy 
Scriptures ; and especially Beza, who in his New Testament, printed by Robert Stephens, 
anno 1556, makes our Saviour Christ say thus to his father, non derelinques cadaver meum 
in Sepulchro : for that which the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, and St. Hierom, according 
to the Hebrew, say, non derelinques animam meam in Inferno : thus the prophet David 
spake it in Hebrew :f thus the Septuagint uttered in Greek ; thus the apostle St. Peter 
alleges it : thus St. Luke in the Acts of the Apostles : and for this St. Augustine calls 
him an infidel that denies it. Yet all this would not suffice to make Beza translate it so: 
because, as he says, he would avoid (certain errors, as he calls them) the catholic doc- 
trine of Umbus patrum and purgatory. And therefore, because else it would make for 
the papists doctrine, he translates animam, carcase ; infernum, graved 

And though our English translators are ashamed of this foul and absurd corruption, 
yet their intention appears to come not much, if any thing at all, short of Beza's ; for, in 
their Bible of 1579, they have it in the text, "Thou wilt not leave my Soul in the 
Grave ;" and in the margin they put, " Or life, or person thereby advertising the 
reader, that if it please him, he may read thus, " Thou shalt not leave my Life in the 
Grave," or, "Thou shalt not leave my Person in the Grave :" as though either man's 
soul or life were in the grave, or anima might be translated person. 1 said, they were 
ashamed of Beza's translation ; but one would rather think, they purposely designed to 
make it worse, if possible. But you see the last translators have indeed been ashamed 
of it, and have corrected it. See you not now, what monstrous and absurd work our 
first pretended reformers made of the Holy Scriptures, on purpose to make it speak for 
their own turns ? By their putting grave in the text, they design to make it a certain 
and absolute conclusion, howsoever you interpret soul, that the Holy Scripture, in this 
place, speaks not of Christ's being in Hell, but only in the grave ; and that according 
to his soul, life, or person ; or, as Beza says, his carcase. And so his " Soul in Hell," 
as the Scripture speaks, must be his carcase, soul, or life in the grave with them. But 
St. Chrysostom says,§ " He descended to Hell, that the souls which were there bound, 
might be loosed." And the words of St. Irenaeus are equally plain : " During the three 
days he conversed where the dead were : as the prophecy says of him, he remembered 
his holy ones who were dead, those who before slept in the Land of Promise ; he descend- 
ed to them, to fetch them out, and save them."|| 

(b) How absurd also is this corruption of theirs, " I will go down into the Grave unto 
my Son?" as though Jacob thought that his son Joseph had been buried in a grave ; 
whereas, a little before, he said, that some " Wild beast had devoured him but if they 
mean the state of all dead men, by Grave, why do they call it Grave, and not Hell, as 
the word is in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin ? But I must demand of our latter translators, 
why they did not correct this, as they have done the former, seeing the Hebrew, Greek, 
and Latin words are the same in both ? It cannot be through ignorance, I find : no, it 
must have been purely out of a design to make their ignorant readers believe, that the 
patriarch Jacob spoke of his body only to descend into the grave to Joseph's body : for 
as concerning Jacob's soul, that, by their opinion, was to ascend immediately after his 
death into Heaven, and not descend into the grave. But if Jacob was forthwith to ascend 
in soul, how could he say, as they translate, " I will go down into the grave, unto my 
son, mourning ?" as if, according to their opinion, he should say, " My son's body is de- 
voured by a beast, and his soul is gone up to Heaven :" well, " 1 will go down to him into 
the Grave." 



* Calvin's Instit. lib. 2. c. 16. Sect. 10. and in his Catechism, f Psal. 15. ver. 10, 
£ See Beza's Annotat. in Act. 2. § St. Chrys. in Eph, 4. |j S. Irenaeus, lib. 5. fine. 



50 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Et eruisti 
animatn meam ex 
Inferno inferiori. 



(b) Eruit ani- 
mam suam manu 
Inferi ? 



Ero mors tua, O 
mors, morsus tuus 
ero Inferne, SjNty. 



Ubi est, mors, sti- 
mulus tuus P ubi 
est, Inferne, victo 
ria tua? a$n. 



In Inferno au- 
tem quis conjitebi- 
tur tibi ? 



Infernus 6? per- 
ditio Hunquam im- 
plentur. 



. (c) Qui in die- 
bus carnis su& pre- 
ces supplicationes- 
que ad eum, qui 
possit ilium salvum 
facere a morte, cum 
clamore valido & 
lachrymis offerens, 
exauditus est pro 
sua reverentia, 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



Thou hast deli- 
vered my soul 
from the 1 lower 
Hell.' 



Shall he deliver 
his soul from the 
hand of 1 Hell ?' 



O death, I will 
will be thy death, 
I will be thy sting, 
O ■ Hell.' 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) Thou hast 
delivered my soul 
from the 'lowest 
Grave.' 



(b) Shall he de- 
liver his soul from 
the hand of the 
' Grave ?' 



— O • Grave,' I 
will be thy de- 
struction. 



The last transla- 
tion of the pro- 
testant Bible, 
edit. London, 
anno 1683. 



Where is, O O death, where 
death, thy sting ? is thy sting ? O 



where is, O « Hell,' 
thy victory ? 



But in * Hell,' 
who shall confess 
to thee ? 



■ Hell' and de- 
struction are never 
full. 



Who in the days 
of his flesh, with 
a strong cry and 
tears, offering 
prayers and sup- 
plications to him 
that could save 
him from death, 
was heard ' for his 
reverence.' 



Grave,' where is 
thy victory ? 



They say, 
the Grave.' 



In 



« The Grave' 
and destruction 
are never full. 



(c) < Which' in 
days of his flesh, 

* offered up' pray- 
ers, with strong 

* crying, unto' him 
that * was able to' 
save him from 
death, * and' was 
heard, ' In that 
which he feared.' 



Instead of 
' lower' Hell, 
they say, 'low- 
est' Hell. 



Shall he de- 
liver his soul 
from the hand 
of the 4 Grave ?' 



O death, I 
will be thy 
' plagues ,' O 
4 Grave,' I will 
be thy destruc- 
tion. 



For 4 Hell, 
they say, 
« Grave.' 



In the 'Grave, 
who shall give 
thee thanks r 



Corrected. 



Who in the 
days, &c. 'And 
was heard in 
that he feared.' 



L1MBUS PATRUM AND PURGATORY. 



5 1 



(a) Understand, good reader, that in the Old Testament none ascended into Heaven. 
5< This way of the holies," as the apostle says, " being not yet made open;"* because 
our Saviour Christ himself was to " Dedicate that new and living way," and begin the 
entrance in his own person, and by his passion to open Heaven ; for none but he was 
f ound worthy to open the seals, and to read the book. Therefore, as I said before, the 
common phrase of the holy Scripture, in the Old Testament, is, even of the best of men, 
as well as others, that dying, they went down, ad inferos, or ad infernum ; that is, de- 
scended not to the grave, which received their bodies only ; but adinferos, " into Hell," 
a common receptacle for their souls. 

So we say in our creed, that our Saviour Christ himself descended into Hell, accord- 
ing to his soul. So St. Hierom, speaking of the state of the Old Testament,f says, " If 
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were in Hell, who was in the kingdom of Heaven ?" and 
again, " Before the coming of Christ, Abraham was in Hell ; after his coming, the thief 
was in Paradise." And lest it might be objected, that Lazarus being in Abraham's bo- 
som, saw the rich glutton afar off in Hell : and that, therefore, both Abraham and Laza- 
rus seem to have been in Heaven, the same holy doctor resolves it, that Abraham and 
Lazarus also were in Hell, but in a place of great rest and refreshing ; and therefore 
very far off from the miserable -wretched glutton, that lay in torments. Which is also 
agreeable to St. Augustine's interpretation of this place,* in the psalm, " Thou hast de- 
livered my soul from the lower Hell ;" who makes this sense of it, that the lower Hell 
is the place wherein the damned are tormented ; the higher Hell is that, wherein the 
souls of the just rested, calling both places by the name of Hell. To avoid this distinc- 
tion of the inferior and higher Hell, our first translators, instead of lower Hell, rendered 
it lowest grave ; which they would not for shame have done, had they not been afraid 
to say in any place of Scripture (how plain soever) that any soul was delivered or return- 
ed from Hell, lest it might then follow, that the patriarchs and our Saviour Christ were 
in such a Hell : and though the last translation has restored the word Hell in this place ; 
yet so loth were our translators to hear the Scripture speak of Limbus Patrum or Pur- 
gatory, that they still retained the superlative lowest, lest the comparative lower (which 
is the true translation) might seem more clearly to evince this distinction between the 
superior and inferior Hell ; though they could not at the same time be ignorant of this 
sentence of Tertullian ; " I know that the bosom of Abraham was no heavenly place, 
but only the higher Hell, or the higher part of Hell."§ Nor can I believe, but they 
must have read these words in St. Chrysostom, upon that place of Esai : " I will break 
the brazen gates, and bruise the iron bars in pieces, and will open the treasure darken- 
ed," &c. So he (the prophet) calls Hell, says he ; " For although it were Hell, yet it 
held the holy souls, and precious vessels, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob."|| 

(6) And thus all along, wherever they find the word Hell, that is, where it signifies 
the place in which the holy fathers of the Old Testament rested, called by the church 
Limbus Patrum, they are sure to translate it grave ; a word as much contrary to the sig- 
nification of the Greek, Hebrew, or Latin words, as bread is to the Latin word lac. If 
I ask them, what is Hebrew, Greek, or Latin for Hell, must they not tell me, h\m aSnr, 
Jnfernus ? If I ask them, what words they will bring' from those languages to signify 
grave, must they not say, *pp rap®, Sepulchrum ? with what face then can they look 
upon these wilful corruptions of theirs ? 

(c) Note here another most damnable corruption of theirs; instead of translating, as 
all antiquity, with a general and full consent, has ever done in this place, " That Christ 
was heard of his father, for his reverence ;" they read, " That he was heard in that 
which he feared;" or, as this last Bible has it, " And was heard in that he feared." 
And who taught them this sense of the text ? doubtless Beza ; whom, for the most part, 
they follow ; and he had it from Calvin, who, he says, was the first that ever found out 
this interpretation. — And why did Calvin invent this, but to defend his blasphemous 
doctrine, " That our Saviour Jesus Christ, upon the cross, was horribly afraid of damna- 
tion : and that he was in the very sorrows and torments of the damned : and that this 
was his descending into Hell : and that otherwise he descended not." Note this, good 
reader, and then judge to what wicked end this translation tends. Who has ever heard 
of greater blasphemy ? and yet they dare presume to force the Scripture, by their false 
translation, to back them in it ; " He was heard in that which he feared ;" as if they 
should say, he was delivered from damnation, and the eternal pains of Hell, of which he 
was sore afraid. What dare they not do, who tremble not at this ? 

* Heb. 9. v. 8. Heb. 10. v. 20. f Epitaph. Nepot. cap. 3. * St. Aug. in Ps. 85, 
ver. 13. § Tertul. 1. 4. adversus Marcion. |[ St. Chrysost. Horn. quodChristus sit 
Deus, To. 5. 



•52 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Ver. 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Si ig-itur 
prxputium justi- 
tias, fixcttoftaTa., 
leg-is custodial, l$c. 



Erant autem jus- 
ti, fixctiot, ambo an- 
te Deum, inceden- 
tes in omnibus man- 
datis et justifca- 
tionibus, %at Sixxt- 
uftxo-i, Domini sine 
querela. 



Byssmum enim 
justijficationes sunt 
sanctorum, rx Si- 



(b) In reliquo, 
reposita est mihi, 
corona justifies, ms 
Sixxiotrvvric, quam 
reddet mi hi Domi- 
nus in ilia die jus- 
tus judex, 6 Stxan>s 
xpirvs arSuo<rii, &C. 



In exem- 

plumjusti, Sixaiag, 
judicii Dei, ut dig- 
ni habeamini in 
regno Dei, pro quo 
et patiamini, si ta- 
men justum est, 
Sixouvov ts-i, apud 
Deum retHbuere 
tribulationem Us 
qui vos tribulant. 



Non enim injus- 
tus, aSiKog, Deus, 
ut obliviscatur ope- 
ns vestri, &c. 



The true English 
According to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



If then the pre- 
puce keep the jus- 
tices of the law, 
&c. 



And they were 
both just before 
God, walking in 
all the command- 
ments and justifi- 
cations of our 
Lord, without 
blame. 



For the silk are 
the justifications 
of saints. 



Concerning the 
rest, there is laid 
up for me a crown 
of justice, which 
our Lord will ren- 
der to me in that 
day a just judge. 



For an example 
of the just judg- 
ment of God, that 
you maybe count- 
ed worthy of the 
kingdom of God, 
for which you suf- 
fer, that yet it be 
just with God to 
repay tribulation 
to them that vex 
you, and to you 
that are vexed, 
rest with us, &c. 



For God is not 
unjust, that he 
should forget your 
works, &c. 



Corruptions in the 
Protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) If the uncir- 
cumcision keep 
the ordinances of 
the law. 



And they were 
both righteous be- 
fore God, walking 
in all the com- 
mandments and 
ordinances of the 
Lord blameless. 



For the fine lin- 
en are the right- 
eousness of saints. 



(b) Henceforth 
there is laid up 
for me a crown 
of righteousness, 
which the Lord 
the righteous 
judge shall give 
me, &c. 



Rejoice, &c. 

which is a token 
of the righteous 
judgment of God, 
that you may be 
counted worthy of 
the kingdom of 
God, for which ye 
suffer. For it is a 
righteous thing 
with God, to re- 
compense tribula- 
tion to them that 
trouble you, and 
to you that are 
troubled rest. 

God is not un- 
righteous, to for- 
get your good 
works and labour. 



The last tran*» 
lation of the 
Protestant Bi- 
ble, Edit. Lon- 
don,annol683, 



If therefore the 
uncircumcision 
keep the right- 
eousness of the 
law. 



And they were 
both righteous 
before God, 
walking in all the 
commandments 
and ordinances 
of the Lord 
blameless. 



For the fine 
linen is the right • 
teousness of 
saints. 



For justice, 
they translate 
righteousness : 
and for a just 
judge, they say, 
a righteous 
judge. 



Here also they 
say. righteous 
judgment, and 
righteous thing, 
instead of just, 
&c. 



For God is not 
unrighteous, kc, 



JUSTIFICATION, AND THE REWARD OF GOOD WORKS. 



(a) As the article of justification has many branches, and as their errors therein are 
manifold, so are their English translations accordingly in many respects false and hereti- 
cal: first, against justification by good works, and by keeping the Commandments, they 
suppress the very name of justification in all such places where the word signifies the 
Commandments, or the Law of God ; and where the Greek signifies most exactly jus- 
tices and justifications, according as our Vulgate Latin translates, justitias etjustificationes, 
there the English translations say, statutes or ordinances ; as you see in these examples, 
where their last translation, because they would seem to be doing, though to small pur- 
pose, changes the first corruption, " ordinances of the law," into righteousness ; another 
word, as far from what it should have been, in comparison, as the first : and to what end 
is all this, but to avoid the term justifications ? They cannot be ignorant how different 
this is from the Greek, which they pretend to translate.— In the Old Testament, perhaps 
they will pretend that they follow the Hebrew word, which is Dipn ; and therefore they 
translate statutes and ordinances; (righteousness too, if they please;) but even there 
also, are not the seventy Greek interpreters sufficient to teach them the signification of 
the Hebrew word, who always interpret it, SiKxtu/uccTa. ; in English, justifications ? 

But admit that they may control the Septuagint in the Hebrew ; yet in the New Tes- 
tament they do not pretend to translate the Hebrew, but rather the Greek. What rea- 
son have they then for rejecting the word just and justifications? surely, no other rea- 
son, but that which their master Beza gives for the same thing ; saying, that " he rejected 
the word justificutiones, on purpose to avoid the cavils that might be made from this 
word, against justification by faith."* As if he should say, this word, truly translated 
according to the Greek, might minister great occasion to prove, by so many places of 
Scripture, that man's justification is not by faith only, but also by keeping the Law, and 
observing the Commandments of God ; which, therefore, are called according to the 
Greek and Latin, justi/icationes, because they concur to justification, and making a man 
just : as by St. Luke's words, also, is well signified ; which have this allusion, that they 
were both just, because they walked in all the justifications of our Lord; which they 
designedly suppress by other words. 

(6) And hereof it also rises, that when Beza could not possibly avoid the word in his 
translation, Apoc. 19. 8. " The silk is the justification of saints ;" he helps the matter 
with this commentary, " That justifications are those good works, which are the testi- 
mony of a lively faith. "f But our English translators have found another way to avoid 
the word, even in their translations : for they, because they could not say ordinances, 
translate, " The righteousness of saints ;" abhorring the word " justifications of saints," 
because they know full well, that this word includes the good works of saints : which 
works, if they should in translating, call their justifications, it would rise up against their 
their "justifications by faith only :" therefore, where they cannot tianslate ordinances 
and statutes, which are terms farthest off' from justification, they say, righteousness, 
making it also the plural number ; whereas the more proper Greek word for righteous- 
ness, is £wSur»«-, (Dan. 6. 22.) which there some of them translate unguiltiness, because 
they will not translate exactly if you would hire them. 

And by their translating righteous, instead of just, they bring it, that Joseph was a 
righteous man, rather than a just man ; and Zachary and Elizabeth were both righteous 
before God, rather than just ; because when a man is called just, it sounds that he is so 
indeed, and not by imputation only. Note also, that where faith is joined with the word 
just, they omit not to translate it just, "The just shall live by faith," to signify, that 
" justification is by faith alone."* 

(c) These places, (2 Tim. 2 Thess. and Heb.) do very fairly discover their false and cor- 
rupt intentions, in concealing the word justice in all their Bibles ; for, if they should trans- 
late truly, as they ought to do, it would infer, § that men are justly crowned in Heaven for 
their good works upon earth, and it is God's justice so to do ; and that he will do so, be- 
cause he is a justjudge, andbecause he will show his just judgment; and he will not forget 
so to do, because he is not unjust ; as the ancient fathers do interpret and expound. St. 
AugMstine most excellently declares, that it is God's grace, favour, and mercy in making 
us, by his grace, to live and believe well, and so to be worthy of Heaven ; and his jus* 
tice and just judgment, to render and repay eternal life for those works which himself 
wrought in us : which he thus expresses, " How should he render or repay as a just 
judge, unless he had given it as a merciful father ?"|| 

* Beza Annot. in Luk. 1. 

f Beza Annot. in Apoc. 19 N 

* Rom. 1. 

§ St. Chrys. Theodoret, Oecumen. upon these places, 
I) St. Aug. de Gra. & lib. Arbitr. cap. 6. 



54 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Existimo, 
\oyl^oju.ai t enim 
quod non sunt con- 
dignx passiones 
hujus temporis ad 
futuram gloria?n, 
&c. «* a£«a ?rpof -rwv 
fA(\\\s<rav So^av. 



(6) Quanta ma- 
gis putatis deteri- 
ora mereri, sup- 
plicia, -aoa-u <%upovoc 

qui Filium Dei con- 
culcaverity &c. 



(c) Gratias agen- 
tes Deo Patri, qui 
digTlOS, txavucravTi, 
nos fecit in partem 
sortis sanctorum in 
lumine. 



(d) Inclinavi 
cor meum ad faci- 
endas justification- 
es tuas in eternum, 
propter retribu- 
tioriem. 



(e) Eum mitem 
qui modico quam 
angeli minoratus 
esty videmus Jesum, 
propter passionem 
mortis gloria et 
honore coronatum. 



The true English 
according to the 
lthemish trans- 
lation. 



For ' I think' 
that the passions 
of this time are 
not * condign to' 
the glory to come, 
that shall be re- 
vealed in us. 



How much 
more, think you, 
doth he ' deserve 
worse punish- 
ments,' who hath 
trodden the Son 
of God under- 
foot? 



Giving thanks 
to God the Fa- 
ther, who hath 
made us ' worthy' 
unto the part of 
the * lot' of the 
saints in the light. 



I have * inclin- 
ed' my heart to do 
thy * justifications 
for ever for re- 
ward.' 



But him that 
was a little lessen- 
ed under the an- 
gels, we see Jesus, 
because of the 
passion of death, 
crowned with glo- 
ry and honour. 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) For I am 
' certainly per- 
suaded,' that the 
* afflictions' of this 
time, are not 
1 worthy' of the 
glory which shall 
be in us. 



(b) How much 
' sorer shall' he 
' be punished, 
which treadeth' 
under-foot the Son 
of God ? 



The last transla* 
tion of the pro- 
testant Bible, 
Edit. London, 
anno 1683. 



(c) Giving 
thanks to God the 
Father, « that' 
hath made us 
' meet to be par- 
takers' of the ' in- 
heritance' of the 
saints in light. 



(</) I have ap- 
plied my heart to 
fulfil thy statutes 
always, even unto 
the end. 



(e) -We see Je- 
sus crowned with 
glory and honour, 
' which' was a lit- 
tle « inferior to' the 
angels, ' through' 
the ' suffering' of 
death. 



For ' I reckon' 
that the suffer- 
ings of this pre- 
sent time, are 
not « worthy' to 
be compared 
with the glory 
which shall be 
revealed in us. 



Of how much 
sorer punish- 
ment, suppose 
ye, shall he be 
thought ' wor- 
thy' who hath 
trodden under- 
foot the Son of 
God. 



Giving thanks 
unjo the Father 
that hath made 
us * meet,' &c. 



— ' Even unto 
the end/ 



But we see 
Jesus, who was 
made a little low- 
er than the an- 
gels, for the suf- 
fering of death 
crowned with 
glory and hon- 



MERITS, AND MERITORIOUS WORKS. 



SB 



(a) I shaix not say much of this gross corruption, because they have been pleased to 
correct it in their last translation : nor will I dwell on their first words, " I am certainly 
persuaded/' which is a far greater asseveration than the apostle uses; I wonder how they 
could thus translate that Greek word xo^/fouca ; but that they were resolved not only to 
translate the apostle's words falsely, against meritorious works, but also to avouch and 
affirm the same forcibly. And for the words following, they are not in Greek, as they 
translate in their first English bibles, " The afflictions are not worthy of the glory," &c. 
because they will not have our suffering here, though for Christ's sake, to merit eternal 
glory; but thus, " The afflictions of this time, are not equal, correspondent, or compara- 
ble to the glory to come," because they are short, but the glory is eternal; the afflictions 
are small and few, in comparison ; the glory great and abundant, above measure. By 
this the apostle would encourage us to suffer ; as he does also in another place very 
plainly, when he says, " Our tribulation, which presently is for a moment and light, work- 
eth, (' prepareth,' says their bible, 1577, with a very false meaning) above measure, ex- 
ceedingly, an eternal weight of glory in us." See you not here, that short tribulation in 
this life, " works," that is, causes, purchases, and deserves an eternal weight of glory in 
the next ? And what is that, but to be meritorious, and worthy of the same ? As St. Cy- 
prian says,* " O what manner of day shall come, my brethren, when our Lord shall recount 
the merits of every one, and pay us the reward, or stipend of faith and devotion !" Here 
you see are merits, and the reward of the same. — Likewise St. Augustine :f " The ex- 
ceeding goodness of God has provided this, that the labours should soon be ended, but 
the rewards of the merits shall endure without end : the apostle testifying, the passions 
of this time are not comparable," &.C. For we shall receive greater bliss, than are the 
afflictions of all passions whatsoever." 

(b) How deceitfully they deal with the Scripture in this place ! One of their bibles £ 
very falsely and corruptly leaving out the words " worthy of," or " deserve," saying, "How 
much sorer shall he be punished ?" &c. And the last of their translations adding, as falsely 
to the text the word " thought:" " How much sorer punishment shall he be thought 
worthy of?" &c. And this is done to avoid this consequence, which must have followed 
by translating the Greek word sincerely; to wit, if the Greek here, by their own translation, 
signifies " to be worthy of," or " to deserve," being spoken of pains or punishments de- 
served; then must they grant us the same word to signify the same thing elsewhere in 
the New Testament, when it is spoken of deserving Heaven, and the kingdom of God, 
as in Luke, ch. 20, and 21. where, if they translate according to the Greek, which they 
pretend to, they should say, " may be worthy," and " they that are worthy ;" and not 
according to the Vulgate Latin, which, I see they are willing to follow, when they think 
it may make the more for their turn. 

(c) The Greek word huvao-ai, they translate to make " meet" in this place, but in other 
places, (viz. Mat. 3. c. 8, 11, and v. 8.) they translate <xavo? "worthy." And why could 
they not follow the old Latin interpreter one step further? seeing this was the place where 
they should have showed their sincerity, and have said, that God made us " worthy" of 
heavenly bliss ; because they cannot butknow, that if luavhg be " worthy," then iKUvuirui must 
needs be " to make worthy." But they follow their old master, Beza,| who tells them, that 
here, and here, and so forth, I have followed the old Latin interpreter, translating it "wor- 
thy," but in such and such a place (meaning this for one) I choose rather to say " meet." 
What presumption is here ! The Greek fathers interpret it " worthy." St. Chrysostom, 
upon this place says,|| " God doth not only give us society with the saints, but makes us 
also worthy to receive so great a dignity." And OZcumenius says, that " It is God's 
glory to make his servants worthy of such good things : and that it is their glory to be 
made worthy of such things.! 

(d) Here is yet another most notorious corruption against " merits:" " I have applied 
my heart to fulfil thy statutes, always, even unto the end ;" and for their evasion here, they 
fly to the ambiguity of the Hebrew word opy, as if the seventy interpreters were not suffi- 
cient to determine the same ; but because they find it ambiguous, they are resolved to take 
their liberty, though contrary to St. Hierom, and the ancient fathers, both Greek and Latin. 

(e) In fine, so obstinately are they set against merits, and meritorious works, that some 
of them think,** that even Christ himself did not merit his own glory and exaltation: 
for making out of which error, I suppose, they have transposed the words of this text, there- 
by making the apostle say, that Christ was made inferior to angels by his suffering death ; 
that is, says Beza, " for to suffer death ;" by which they quite exclude the true sense, that 
" for suffering death, he was crowned with glory;" which are the true words and meaning 1 
of the apostle. But in their last translations they so place the words, that they will have it 
left so ambiguous, as you may follow which sense you will : Intolerable is their deceit. 

* St. Cyprian, Ep. 56. v. 3. f St. August. Serm. 57. de Sanct. * Bible of 1562. 
§ Beza Annotat. in 3 Matth. Nov. Test. 1556. || CEcum. in Caten. H St. Basil, in 
Orat, Litur. ** See Calvin, in Epist. ad Philip. 



56 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Ver. 



St. John, 
chap. 1. 
ver. 12. 



1 Corinth, 
chap. 15. 
ver. 10. 



Ephesians, 
chap. 3. 
ver. 12. 



2 Corinth, 
chap. 6. 
ver. 1. 



Romans, 
chap. 5. 
ver. 6. 



1 Ep. John, 
chap. 5. 
ver. 3. 



St. Matth. 
chap. 19. 
ver. 11. 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Quotquotau 
tern receperunt 
eutn, cledit eis po- 
testatem t*wltp fi- 
lios Dei fieri. 



(b) — - Sed 
abundantius Hits 
omnibus laboravi 
non ego autem, sed 
Gratia Deimecum 
» %dptr t5 0«5 t> <rvv 
lust. 



(c) Inquohabe- 
mus fiduciam & ac 
cessum in confiden 
tia perfidem ejus. 



(d) Adjuvantes 

IwtpyovvTis autem 
exhortamur, ne in 
vacuum gratiam 
Dei recipiatis. 



(e) Ut quid 
enim Christus, cum 
adhuc infirmi esse- 

mUS, OVTQV Yf/XUV CUT' 

6f vav secundum tern- 
pus pro imjnismor- 
tuus eat. 



(f) H<ec est 
enim charitas Dei, 
ut mandata ejus 
custodiamus : & 
mandata ejus gra- 
via non sunt, al lv- 
toXui (Zapucu ux cftr/v. 



(g) Qui dixit il- 
lis, non omnes ca- 

pilint « ■cravTwr ^upv- 
<rt verbum istud, sed 
quibas datum est. 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



But as many as 
received him, he 
gave them * power' 
to be made the 
sons of God. 



But I have 

laboured more a- 
bundantly than all 
they; yet not I, 
but the grace of 
God « with me.' 



In whom we 
have * affiance' and 
1 access* in confi- 
dence, by the faith 
of him. 



And 'we help- 
ing,' do exhort, 
that you receive 
not the grace of 
God in vain. 



For, why did 
Christ, when we 
as yet ' were 
weak,' according 
to the time, die 
for the impious. 



For this is the 
charity of God, 
that we keep his 
commandments : 
and his command- 
ments are not 
heavy.' 



All men 

do not* receive 
this saying. 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) But as many 
as received him, 
he gave them 

1 prerogative,' 
(dignity, says Be- 
za) to be the sons 
of God. 

(b) yet not 

I, but the grace of 
God ' which is' 
with me. 



(c) 'By* whom 
we have ' bold- 
ness' and ' en- 
trance, with the' 
confidence ' which 
is' by the faith of 
him, (or in him, 
as Beza has it.) 

(</) And we 
' God's labourers,' 
8cc. In another Bi- 
ble, We * together 
are God's labour- 
ers.' 



(e) Christ, when 
we were yet 'of 
no strength, died' 
for the ' ungodly.' 



. (/) And 

his command- 
ments are not 
4 grievous.' 



(g) All 

men * cannot* re- 
ceive this saying. 



The last trans- 
lation of the 
protestant Bi- 
ble, edit. Lon- 
don, an. 1683. 



Corrected. 



— Yet not L 
but the grace of 
God which was 
with me. 



Corrected. 



Corrected. 



For when we 
were yet ' with- 
out strength,' in 
due time Christ 
died for the un- 
godly. 



— Instead of, 
* his command- 
ments are not 
heavy,'they say, 
'are not griev- 
ous.' 



All men 

' cannot' receive 
this saying. 



AGAINST FREE WILL. 



5? 



(a) Against free will, instead of power, they, in their translation, use the word prerogative ; 
and Beza, the word dignity ; protesting* that whereas, in other places, he often translated this 
Greek word, power and authority, here he rejected both indeed against free will; which, he 
says, the sophists would prove out of this place, reprehending Erasmus for following them in 

his translation. -Bat whereas the Greek word is indifferently used to signify dignity or liberty, 

he that will translate either of these, and exclude the other, restrains the sense of the Holy 
Ghost, and determines it to his own fancy. Now we may as well translate liberty, as Beza does 
dignity ; but we must not abridge the sense of the Holy Ghost to one particular meaning ; and 
therefore we translate potestas and power, words indifferently signifying both dignity and liber- 
ty. But in their last Bible it is corrected. It would have been well, if they had corrected this 
next, though I think of the two, they have made it worse ; translating, " Not I, but the grace 
of God which was with me," — " which is with me," say their old Bibles. 

(6) By which falsity, they here also restrain the sense of the Holy Ghost ; whereas, if they 
had translated according to sincerity, — " Yet not I, but the grace of Gfcd with me," the text might 
have had not only the sense they confine it to, but also this, " Not I, but the grace of God which la- 
boured with me." So that, by this latter, it may be evidently signified, that the grace of God, and 
the apostle, both laboured together ; and not only grace, as if the apostle had done nothing, like 
unto a block, or forced only ; but that the grace of God did so concur, as the principal agent, 
with all his labours, that his free-will wrought with it : and this is the most approved intepreta- 
tion of this place, which their translation, by putting, " which is," or, " which was," into the 
text, excludes. 

But they reprehend the Vulgate Latin interpreter for neglecting the Greek article, not con- 
sidering that the same many times cannot be expressed in Latin ; the Greek phrase having this 
prerogative above the Latin, to represent a thing more briefly, commodiously, and significantly 
by the article, as Jacobus Zehedaei, Jacobus Alphceiy Judas Jacobi, JWaria Cleophcs : in all which, 
though the Greek article is not expressed, yet they are all sincerely translated into Latin. Nor 
can the article be expressed without adding more than the article, and so not without adding to 
the text, as they do very boldly in such speeches, throughout the New Testament. Yea, they 
do it when there is no article in the Greek, and that purposely : as in this of the Ephesians,(c) 
where they say, " Confidence is by faith," as though there were no " Confidence by works." 
The Greek, tv-ai-aofimu Siamg 7rinat, bears not that translation, unless there were an article after 
confidence, which is not ; but they add it to the text : as also Beza does the like, Rom. 8. 2. and 
their English Geneva Testaments after him, to maintain the heresy of imputative justice : as in 
his annotations he plainly deduces, saying confidently, " I doubt not, but a Greek article must 
be understood ;" and therefore, forsooth, put into the text also. He does the same in St. James, 
2. v. 20. still debating the case in his annotations, why he does so ; and when he has concluded 
in his fancy, that this or that is the sense, h« put it so in the text, and translates accordingly. 
But if they say, that in this place of the Corinthians there is a Greek article, and therefore they 
do well to express it : I answer, first, the article may then be expressed in translation, when 
there can be but one sense of the same. Secondly, it must be expressed, when we cannot other- 
wise give the sense of the place, as Mat. 1. v. 6. ex t»j- t« 'Ovpj'w, ex ea quae fuit Urice, where the 
Vulgate interpreter omits it not; but in this of St. Paul, which we now speak of, where the sense 
is doubtful, and the Latin expresses the Greek sufficiently otherwise, he leaves it also doubtful 
and indifferent, not abridging it as they do, saying, " The grace of God which is with me." 

(d) Again, in this other place of the Corinthians, where theSpostle calls himself and his fellow 
preachers, " God's co-adjutors, co-labourers," or such as labour and work with God, how falsely 
have their first translators made it, let themselves, who have corrected it in their last Bible, judge. 

(e) And in this next, the apostle's words do not signify, that " we had had no strength," or, 
" were without strengtli ;" but that we Were " weak, feeble, infirm :" and this they corrupt to 
defend their false doctrine, " That free-will was altogether lost by Adam's sin."f £ 

(/) When they have bereaved and spoiled a man of his free-will, and left him without all 
strength, they go so far in this point, that they say, the regenerate themselves have not free-will 
and ability ; no, not by and with the grace of God, to keep the commandment. To this purpose, 
they translate, His commandments are not " grievous," rather than " are not heavy ;" for in 
saying, " they are not heavy," it would follow, they might be kept and observed ; but in say- 
ing, " they are not grievous," that may be true, were they never so heavy or impossible, 
through patience ; as when a man cannot do as he would ; yet it grieves him not, being patient 
and wise, because he is content to do as he can, and is able. 

(g) Our Saviour says not, in this place of St. Matthew, as they falsely translate, " All men 
cannot," but, " All men do not ;" and, therefore, St. Augustine says, " Because all will not."§ 
But when our Saviour says afterwards, " He that can receive, let him receive :" he adds another 
Greek word to express that sense, 6 Swa^i*®- <%upuv %upu1u : whereas by the protestant transla- 
tion, he might have said, 6 ^upuv %uf>itTu. Vide above. 

* Beza Nov. Test. 1580. f Whitaker, page 18. * See Beza's Annot. in Rom. 2. 27. 
% St. August, dc gra,. & lib. Arbitr. cap. 4. 

8 



58 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Ver. 



Romans, 
chapt. 5. 
verse 18. 



Romans, 
chapt. 4. 
verse 3. 



2 Corinth, 
chapt. 5. 
verse ult. 



jf'phesians, 
chapt. 1. 
verse 6. 



Daniel, 
chapt. 6. 
verse 22. 



Romans, 
chapt. 4. 
verse 6. 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Igitur sicut 
per unius delictum 
in omnes homines in 
condemnationem : 
sic et per unius fas- 
ti tiam in o?nnes ho- 
mines in justifica- 
tionem vitx.' 



O) Credidit 
Abraham Deo, et 
reputatum est illi 
ad justitiam. u( 
<Jix.aic<rvvnv. 



(c) — Ut nos 
efficeremur justitia 
Dei ipso. Sinaioirvvti 

0£W EV CtVTU, 



(d) In qua gra- 
tificavit,t ^apiructv, 
nos in dilecto Jilio 
suo. 



(e) — Quia co- 
ram eo justitia in- 
venta est in me. 



(/) Sicut et 
David dicit, htyu, 
beatitudinem ho mi- 
nis cui Deus ac- 
ceptofert justitiam 
sine operibus. 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



Therefore, as by 
the offence of one, 
unto all men to 
condemnation : so 
also, by the justice 
of one, unto all 
men to justifica- 
tion of life. 



Abraham believ- 
ed God, and it was 
reputed him to 
' justice.' 



That we 

might be made the 
'justice' of God in 
him- 



Wherein he hath 
' gratified us' in 
his beloved Son. 



— Because be- 
fore him, ' justice 
was found in me.' 



As David also 
* term eta' the 
blessedness of a 
man, to whom God 
reputeth 'justice' 
without works. 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



(a) ' Likewise 
then.' as by the 
offence of one, 
' the fault came 
on' all men to con- 
demnation : so by 
the ' justifying 1 of 
one * the benefit 
aboundeth to- 
wards' all men, to 
' the' justification 
of life. 



(b) Abraham 
believed God, and 
it was reputed to 
him ' for' justice. 



(c) That we 
'by his means 
should be that 
righteousness 
which before' God 
' is allowed.' 



(d) Wherein he 
hath ' made' us 
' accepted,' (or, 
' freely accepted') 
in his beloved Son. 



(e) Because be- 
fore him, ' my' 
justice was found 
out. 



(/) As David 
« describeth' the 
blessedness of 
' the' man, ' unto' 
whom God * im- 
puteth righteous- 



The last t-ransla* 
tion of the pro- 
testant Bible, 
Edit. London., 
anno 1683. 



Therefore, as 
by the offences 
of one, * judg- 
ment came upon' 
all men to con- 
demnation : even 
so by the right- 
eousness of one, 
' the free gift 
came upon' all 
men unto justifi- 
cation of life. 



And it was ac 
counted unto 
him * for right- 
eousness.' 



That we might 
be made the 
' righteousness' 
of God in him. 



be 



Wherein 
hath made 
' accepted' 
the Beloved. 



For as much as 
before him ' in- 
nocency was 
found in me.' 



Instead 
f termeth' 



of 

iicuc they 
say, 'describeth;' 
and for 'justice, 
they have ' right- 
eousness.' 



1 
i 



INHERENT JUSTICE. 



(a) Beza, in his annotations on Rom. 5. I* 51 . protests, that his adding to this text is es- 
pecially against inherent justice, which, he says, is to be avoided as nothing" more. His 
false translation you see our English Bibles follow ; and have added no fewer than six 
words in this one verse ; yea, their last translations have added seven, and some of these 
words much different from those of their former brethren ; so that it is impossible to 
make them agree betwixt themselves. I cannot but admire to see how loth they are 
to suffer the Holy Scripture to speak in behalf of inherent justice. 

(6) So also in this next place, where they add the word " for" to the text, " And it 
was reputed to him for justice," for " righteousness" says their last righteous work ; for 
the longer they live, the further they are divided from justice ; because they would have 
it to be nothing else, but in stead and place of justice : thereby taking away true inherent 
justice, even in Abraham himself. But admit this translation of theirs, which, notwith- 
standing in their sense, is false, must it needs signify not true inherent justice, because 
the Scripture says, it was reputed for justice ? Do such speeches import, that it is not so 
indeed, but is only reputed so ? Then if we should say, this shall be reputed to thee 
" for" sin, " for" a great benefit, he. it should signify it is no sin indeed, nor great bene- 
fit. But let them remember, that the Scripture uses to speak of sin and of justice alike, 
reputabitur tibi in peccatum, " It shall be reputed to thee for sin," as* St. Hierom trans- 
lates it.* If then justice only.be reputed, sin also is only reputed: if sin be in us in- 
deed, justice is in us indeed. And the Greek fathers make it plain, that " To be re- 
puted unto justice," is to be true justice indeed; interpreting St. Paul's words, that 
"Abraham obtained justice," " Abraham was justified;" for that is, say they, "It was 
reputed him to justice." And St. James testifies, that "In that Abraham was justified 
by faith and works, the Scripture was fulfilled," which says, "It was reputed him to 
justice," Gen. 15. ver. 6. in which words of Genesis there is not " for justice," or "in- 
stead of justice," as the English Bibles have it, for the Hebrew npus V? should not 
be so translated, especially when they meant it was so counted or reputed for justice, 
that it was not justice indeed. 

(c) Again, how intolerably have their first translations corrupted St. Paul's words, 2 
Cor. 5. which though their latter Bibles have undertaken to correct, yet their heresy 
would not suffer them to amend also the word " righteousness !" It is death to them to 
hear of justice. 

(d) Here again they make St. Paul say, that God made us " accepted," or " freely 
accepted in his beloved Son," (their last translation leaves out Son very boldly, changing 
the word his into the, "Accepted in the beloved,") as if they had a mind to say, that 
" In, or among all the beloved in the world, God has only accepted us :" as they make 
the angel in St. Luke say to our blessed lady, " Hail ! freely beloved," to take away all 
grace inherent and resident in the blessed virgin, or in us : whereas the apostle's word 
signifies that we are truly made grateful, or gracious and acceptable ; that is to sa}', that 
our soul is inwardly endued and beautified with grace, and the virtues proceeding from 
it; and consequently, is holy indeed before the sight of God, and not only so accepted 
or reputed, as they imagine. Which St. Chrysostom sufficiently testifies in these words, 
" He said not, which he freely gave us, but, wherein he made us grateful ; that is, not 
only delivered us from sins, but also made us beloved and amiable, made our soul 
beautiful and grateful, such as the angels and archangels desire to see, and such as him- 
self is in love withal, according to that in the psalm, the king shall desire or be in love 
with thy beauty."f St. Hierom speaking of baptism, says, " Now thou art made clean in 
the laver : and of thee it is said, who is she that ascends white ? and let her be washed, 
yet she cannot keep her purity, unless she be strengthened from our Lord ;"+ whence it 
is plain, that by baptism original sin being expelled, inherent justice takes place in the 
soul, rendering it clean, white, and pure ; which purity the soul, strengthened by God's 
grace, may keep and conserve. 

(e) Another falsification they make here in Daniel, translating, "My justice was 
found out ;" and in another Bible, " My unguiltiness was found out," to draw it from in- 
herent justice, which was in Daniel. In their last edition you see they are resolved to 
correct their brethren's fault ; notwithstanding though they mend one, yet they make 
another; putting innocency instead of justice. It is very strange that our English pro- 
testant divines should have such a pique against justice, that they cannot endure to see 
it stand in the text, where both the Chaldee, Greek, and Latin place it. 

(/) It must needs be a spot of the same infection, that they translate describeth here j 
as though imputed righteousness (for so they had rather say, than justice) were the de- 
scription of blessedness. 

* Deut. c. 23, and 24. GZcum. in Caten. Photius, chap. 2. ver. 23. f St. Chrys. in 
this place of the Ephesians. i St. Hierom. lib. 3. contra Pelagianos. 



60 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



(a) Accedamus 
cum vero corde in 
plenitudine fidei, 



(b) Et si habue- 
ro omnem, •sras-av, 
fidem, ita ut montes 
transferam, chari- 
taiem autem non 
habueroy nihil sum. 



Et adhuc exel- 
lentiorem viam vo- 
bis demonstro. 



The true English, 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



Let us approach 
with a true heart, 
in 'fulness' of faith. 



And if I should 
have " all' faith, 
so that I could re- 
move mountains, 
and have not cha- 
rity, I am nothing. 



And yet I show 
you a 'more excel- 
lent way.' 



(c) Tides quo- 
niam fides co-ope- 
rabatur, o-whpya, 
operibus illhis. 



(d ) Et Jesus 
dixit Mi, respice, fi- 
des tua te salvum 
fecit, m -Grins' c-3 an- 

(70)X£ £T£. 



Fade, fides tua 
te salvum fecit, 



Seest thou that 
faith ' did work 
with his works. 



Thy faith hath 
! made thee whole. 



Thy faith hath 
made thee safe 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



The last transla- 
tion of the 
protestant Bi- 
ble, edit. Lon- 
don, an. 1683, 



(a) Let us 'draw 
nigh' with a true 
heart, in ' assur- 
ance' of faith. 



(b) If I should 
have 'whole' faith. 
Totam fidem, saith 
Beza, for omnem fi- 
dem. 



Beza in Testa- 
ment 1556, trans- 
lates it, 'Behold 
moreover also' I 
show you a way 
' most diligently.' 

And in another, 
viz. of 1565. And 
' besides,' I show 
you a way ' to ex- 
cellency.' 



(c) Thou seest 
that faith ' was a 
helper of his 
works. Beza. 



(d ) Thy faith 
hath ' saved' thee 



Let us draw 
near with a true 
heart, in ' full 
assurance' of 
faith. 



All* faith. 



Thy faith hath 
saved' thee. . ' 



Corrected. 



Corrected. 



Thy faith hath 
saved thee,' 



Corrected. 



IN DEFENCE OF THE SUFFICIENCY OF FAITH ALONE. 



61 



All other means of salvation being" thus taken away, as you have already seen, their 
only and last refuge is faith alone ; and that not the Christian faith contained in the arti- 
cles of the Creed, and such like ; but a special faith and confidence, whereby every man 
must assuredly believe, that himself is the son of God, and one of the elect predestined 
to salvation. If he be not, by faith, as sure of this, as of Christ's incarnation and death, 
he shall never be saved. 

(a) For maintaining this heresy, they force the Greek text to express the very word 
of assurance and certainty thus, " Let us draw nigh with a true heart, in assurance of 
faith :" their last translation makes it " in full assurance of faith ;" adding the word Full 
to what it was before; and that, either because they would be thought to draw that word 
from the original, or else because they would thereby signify such an assurance or cer- 
tainty, as should be beyond all manner of doubt or fear ; thereby excluding not only 
charity, but even hope also, as unnecessary. 

(b) The word in the Greek is far different from their expression ; for it signifies, pro= 
perly, the fulness and completion of any thing; and therefore, the apostle joins it some- 
times with faith, sometimes with hope, (as in Heb. 6. ver. 11.) sometimes with knowledge 
orunderstanding, (Col. 2. ver. 2.) to signify the fulness of all three, as the Vulgate Latin 
interprets most sincerely, (Rom. 4. ver. 21.) translates it. Thus when the Greek sig- 
nifies " fulness of faith/* rather than " full assurance," (or, as Beza has it, " certain 
persuasion") " of faith;" they err in the precise translation of it; and much more do 
they err in the sense when they apply it to the " certain" and " assured faith," that every 
man ought to have, as they say, of his own salvation, whereas the Greek fathers ex- 
pound it of the " fulness of faith," that every faithful man must have of all such things 
in Heaven, as he sees not ; namely, that Christ is ascended thither, that he shall come 
with glory to judge the world, &c* adding further, and proving out of the apostle's 
words next following, that (the protestants) " only faith is not sufficient, be it ever so 
special or assured."f — For the said reason do they also translate, " the special gift of 
faith," (Sap. 3. 14.) instead of, " the chosen gift of faith." Another gross corruption 
they have in Ecclesiasticus, chap. 5. ver. 5. But, because in their bibles of the later 
stamp, they have rejected these books, as not canonical, though they can show us no 
more reason or authority for their so doing, than for altering and corrupting the text, 1 
shall be content to pass it by. 

(c) Beza, by corrupting this place of the Corinthians, translating totam Jidem for 
omnem fidem, thinks to exempt from the apostle's words, their special justifying faith ; 
whereas it may be easily seen, that St. Paul names and means " all faith," as he doth 
" all knowledge," and " all mysteries," in the foregoing words. And Luther con- 
fesses, that he thrust the word " only, (only faith") into the text4 

(J) Also by his falsifying this text of St. James, he would have his reader think, as 
he also expounds it, " that faith was an efficient cause, and fruitful of good works ;" 
whereas the apostle's words are plain, that faith wrought together with his works ; yea, 
and that his faith was by works made perfect. This is an impudent handling of Scrip- 
ture, to make works the fruit only, and effect of faith ; which is their heresy. 

(e) Again, in all those places of the Gospel, where our blessed Saviour requires the 
people's faith, when he healed them of corporal diseases only, they gladly translate, 
" thy faith hath saved thee," rather than " thy faith hath healed thee," or, " thy faith 
hath made thee whole." And this they do, that by joining these words together, they 
may make it sound in the ears of the people, that faith saves and justifies a man : for so 
Beza notes in the margin, fides salvat, " faith saveth ;" whereas the faith that was here 
required, was of Christ's power and omnipotence only ; which as Beza confesses, may be 
possessed by the devils themselves ; and is far from the faith that justifies.^ 

But they will say, the Greek signifies as they translate it : I grant it does so ; but it 
signifies very commonly to be healed corporally, as, by their own translation, in these 
places, Mark 5. ver. 26. Luke 8. ver. 36, 48, 50. and in other places, where they trans- 
late, " I shall be whole, they were healed, he was healed, she shall be made whole." 
And why do they here translate it so ? Because they know, " to be saved," imports 
rather the salvation of the soul : and therefore, when faith is joined with it, they translate 
it rather * 4 saved" than " healed," to insinuate their justification by " faith only." 

But how contrary to the doctrine of the ancient fathers this protestant error of " faith 
alone justifying" is, may be seen by those who please to read St. Augustine, Be Fide St 
Qpere, c. 14. 

To conclude, I will refer my protestant Soltfidian to the words of St. James the 
apostle ; where he will find, that faith alone, without works, cannot save him. 



* St. Chrysost. Theodoret. Theophyl. upon Rom. 10. f St. Cry^ost. Horn. 19. c. 10, 
ad Heb. f Luth. torn. 2. fol. 405. edit. Witte. anno 1551. § Beza Annot. in 1 Cor. 13. 2, 



63 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Vulgate Latin 
' Text. 



(~aj Itaque fra- 
tres state ctf tenet e 
traditiones, urupafo- 
<ret(, quas didicistis, 
sive per sermonem, 
sive per epistolam 
nostrum. 



• • Ut subtra- 
hatis vos ab omni 
fratre ambidnnte 
irwrdinate, <y non 
secundum traditio- 
nem, quam accepe- 
runt a nobis. . 



Zaudo autem vos 
fratres, quod per 
omnia met memores 
estisy & sicut tra- 
didi vobis, pracep- 
ta mea tenetis. xa- 

<Wap*liQ<Tlli K«T£^5TE. 



("b J Si ergo mor. 
tui estis cum Chris- 
to ab elementis 
hujus mundi : quid 
adhuc tanquam vi- 
ventes hi mundo de- 
cernitis? t* Soyp.cc- 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



C cj Scientes 
quod non corrupti- 
bility auro, vel 
argento redempti 
estis de vana ves- 
tra conversatione 
paternce traditionis. 

avarpoyris TXccTpoTZcc- 
paSoTts. 



Therefoi'e, bre- 
thren, stand, and 
hold the * tradi- 
tions' which you 
have learned, whe- 
ther it be by word, 
or by our epistle. 



— That you 
withdraw your- 
selves from every 
brother walking 
inordinately, and 
not according to 
the ' traditions' 
which they have 
received of us. 



And I praise 
you brethren, that 
in all things you 
be mindful of me, 
and as I have de- 
livered unto you, 
you keep my pre- 
cepts. 



If then you be 
dead with Christ 
from the elements 
of this world, why 
do you yet ' de- 
cree' as living in 
the world? 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



fa J For ' tradi- 
tions,' they say 
* ordinances.' 



Instead of ' tra- 
dition,' they trans- 
late 4 instructions.' 



— And ' keep 
the ordinances,' as 
I have * preached' 
unto you. 



Knowing that 
not with corrupti- 
ble things, gold or 
silver, you are re- 
deemed from your 
vain conversation 
of your fathers' 
tradition. 



fbj If ' ye' he 
dead with Christ 
from the * rudi- 
ments' of ' the' 
world, why, * as 
though' living in 
the world, ' are ye 
led with tradi- 
tions ?' and * are 
ye burthened with 
traditions ?' 



(~cj 1 You were' 
not redeemed with 
corruptible things, 
gold or silver, from 
your vain conver- 
sation * received 
by the' tradition 
« of the' fathers. 



The last Trans- 
lation of the 
protestant Bi- 
ble, edit. Lon- 
don, an. 1683, 



Corrected. 



Corrected. 



And 

keep the ' or- 
dinances,' as I 
have delivered 
them to you. 



■ Why as 

though living in 
the world, are 
you ' subject to 
ordinances ?' 



— From your 
vain conversa- 
tion * received 
by tradition 
from your fa- 
thers.* 



APOSTOLICAL TRADITIONS, 



63 



A general mark, wherewith all heretics that have ever disturbed God's church have 
been branded, is, " To reject apostolical traditions," and to fly to the Scripture, as by 
themselves expounded for their " only rule of faith." We read not of any heresy since 
the apostles' time, on which this character has been more deeply stamped, than in those 
of this last age, especially the first heads of them, and those who were the interpreters 
and translators of the Scriptures ; whom we find to have been possessed with such pre- 
judice against apostolical tradition, that wheresoever the Holy Scripture speaks against 
certain traditions of the 'Jews, there all the English translations follow the Greek exactly, 
never omitting to translate the Greek word -napaJW/?, " tradition." On the contrary, 
wheresoever the sacred text speaks in commendation of traditions, to wit, such traditions 
as the apostles delivered to the church, there(a) all their first translations. agree not to 
follow the Greek, which is still the self-same word ; but for traditions, use the words or- 
dinances or instructions, preachings, institutions, and any word else, rather than tradi- 
tion : insomuch, that Beza, the master of our English Scripturists, translates the word 
•erctpafoo-u traditam doctrinam, " The doctrine delivered," putting the singular number 
for the plural, and adding " doctrine" of his own accord.* 

Who could imagine their malice and partiality against traditions to be so great, that 
they should all agree, in their first translations I mean ; for they could not but blush at 
it in their last, with one consent so duly and exactly, in all these places set down in the 
former page, to conceal and suppress the word tradition ; which, in other places, they 
so gladly make use of? I appeal to their consciences, whether these things were not 
done on purpose, and with a very wicked intention, to signify to the reader, that all 
traditions are to be reproved and rejected, and none allowed. 

(b) In some places they do so gladly use this word tradition, that rather than want it, 
they make bold to thrust it into the text, when it is not in the Greek at all; as you see 
in this place of the epistle to the Colossians.-f- — " Why, as though living in the world, 
are you led with traditions ?" And as another English bible reads more heretically, 
" Why are ye burthened with traditions ?" Doubtless, they knew as well then, as they 
do now at this day, that this Greek word Joy^a, doth not signify tradition ; yea, they 
were not ignorant, when a little before, in the same chapter and in other places, them- 
selves translate Soy/tara, " ordinances," " decrees."^ Was not this done then to make 
the very name of tradition odious among the people ? 

And though some of these gross corruptions are corrected by their last translators, 
yet we have no reason to think that they were amended out of any good or pure inten- 
tion, but the rather to defend some of their own traditions, viz. wearing of the rochet, sur- 
plice, four-cornered cap, keeping the first day in the week holy, baptizing infants, &c. all 
which things being denied by their more refined brethren, as not being clearly to be proved 
out of Scripture, and they having no other refuge to fly to but tradition, were forced to 
translate tradition in some places, where it is well spoken of. But, I say, this could not 
be from any pure intention of correcting the corrupted Scripture ; but rather for the 
said self-end ; which appears evidently enough from their not also correcting other no- 
torious falsifications, (as 1 Pet. 1. 18.)(c) " You were not redeemed with corruptible 
things, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers ;" where the 
Greek U T?r na.Ta.iois v^Zi dvas-popric tx&Tpozs*po$o r Tx, is rather to be thus translated, and it 
is the Greek they pretend to follow, and not our Vulgate Latin, which they condemn : 
" From your vain conversation delivered by the fathers :" but because it sounds with the 
simple people, to be spoken against the traditions of the Roman church, they were as 
glad to suffer it to pass, as the former translators were, for the same reason, to foist in 
the word tradition; and for delivered, to say received. I say, because it is the phrase 
of the catholic church, that it has received many tilings by tradition, which they would 
here control by likeness of words, in their false translations. But concerning the word 
tradition, they will tell us, perhaps, the sense thereof is included in the Greek word, de- 
livered. We grant it : but would they be content, if we should always expressly add 
tradition, where it is so included ? Then should we say in the Corinthians, " I praise you, 
that as I have delivered to you, by tradition, you keep my precepts or traditions." — And 
igain, " For I received of our Lord, which also I delivered unto you, by tradition. "§ — And 
n another place, " As they, by tradition, delivered unto us, which from the beginning 
saw," &c. and such like, by their example, we should translate in this sort. But we use 
lot this licentious manner in translating the Holy Scriptures ; neither is it a translator's 
oart, but an interpreter's, and his that makes a commentary : nor does a good cause 
ieed any other translation than the express text of the Scripture. 



* 2 Thess. 2, 3. t Bib. 1579. ± Col. 2. 14, Eph, 2. 15, § 1 Cor. 11. verse 2, 23. 
Luke, 1. v. 2, 



G4 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS, &C. 



But if you say,* that our Vulgate Latin has, in this place, the word tradition ; we 
grant it has so, and therefore we also translate accordingly : but you, as I hinted above, 
profess to translate the Greek, and not our Vulgate Latin, which you condemn as papis- 
tical, and say it is the worst of all, though Beza, your master, pronounces it to be the 
best.f And will you, notwithstanding, follow the said Vulgate Latin, rather than the 
Greek, when you "find it seem to make for your purpose ? This is your partiality and in- 
constancy. One while you will follow it, though it differ from the Greek ; and another 
time you reject it, though it agree with the Greek most exactly ; as we have shown you 
above, (Col. 2.- 20.) where the Vulgate Latin hath nothing of traditions, but, quid decer- 
?iiti$, as it is in the Greek ; yet there your sincere brethren translate, " Why are ye bur- 
thened with traditions f" 

Is not all this to bolster up their errors and heresies, without sincerely following either 
the Greek or Latin ? The Greek, at least, why do they not follow ? Doth the Greek 
■zvccpaSoc-itg induce them to say, ordinances for traditions ? Or S6y^a.H lead them to say, 
traditions for decrees ? Or SiKctto/uxla, ■Grp£c-/5u7^of, uSns, t\Su\ov> 8tc. force them to translate 
ordinances for justifications, elder for priest, grave for Hell, image for idol, &c. No ! 
Where they are afraid of being disadvantageous to their heresies, they scruple not to 
reject and forsake both the Greek and Latin. 

Though protestants, in the last translation of the Bible, have indeed corrected this 
rrror in several places, not in all, on purpose, thereby to defend themselves against their 
puritanical brethren, when they charge them with several popish observations, ceremo- 
nies, and traditions, which they cannot maintain by Scripture alone, without being forced, 
as is said, to fly to unwritten traditions: yet, when they either dispute with, or write 
against, Catholics, they utterly deny traditions, and stick fast to the Scripture alone, for 
their " only rule of faith :" falsely asserting, that the Scripture was received by the pri- 
mitive church as a " perfect rule of faith." 

These are the words of a late ministerial* guide of the church of England, " The Scrip- 
ture was yet (viz. when St. Augustine was sent into England) received as a perfect 
rule of faith :" for which he cites another authority like his own. ' But how true this is, 
let the holy fathers of the first five hundred years satisfy us. 

St. Chrysostom, expounding the words of St. Paul, (2 Thess. chap. 15.) affirms, that 
" Hereby it appears, that the apostles did not deliver all things by epistle, but many 
things without writing, and these are worthy of faith : wherefore also, let us esteem the 
tradition of the church to be believed. It is a tradition, seek no further."§ 

And the same exposition is given by St. Basil, Theophylact, and St. John Damascene : 
as also by St. Epiphanius; who says, "We must use tradition, for all things cannot be 
received from divine Scripture ; wherefore the holy apostles have delivered some things 
by tradition : even as the holy apostle says, as I have delivered to you, and elsewhere ; 
so I teach, and have delivered in the churches."|| 

St. Augustine, proving that those who were baptized by heretics should not be re- 
baptized, says, " The apostles commanded nothing hereof; but that doctrine which was 
opposed herein against Cyprian, is to be believed to proceed from their tradition, as many 
things be, which the church holds ; and are therefore well believed to be commanded of 
the apostles, although they are not written. "H These words of this great doctor are so 
clear, that Mr. Cartvvright,** a protestant, speaking thereof, says, " To allow St. Augus- 
tine's words, is to bring in popery again." And in another place,ff " If St. Augustine's 
judgment be a good judgment, then there be some things commanded of God, which 
are not in the Scriptures, and thereupon no sufficient doctrine contained in the Scrip- 
tures." How to make all this agree with the doctrine of our present ministerial guides 
of the church of England, who teach that in those primitive times, " The Scripture 
was received as a perfect and only rule of faith," will be a task that, I am confident, no 
wise man, who has either honour, credit, or respect for truth, will venture to undertake. 

* Discovery of the Rock, page 147. f Beza Prxf. in Nov. Test. 1556. t See the 
pamphlet, called, a Second Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of 
England, &.c. page 13. n. 24. § St. Chrys. in 2 Thess. Horn. 4. |j See St. Basil de 
Spirit Sanct. c. 29. Theophil. in 2 Thess. 2. Damasc. cap. 17. de Imag. Sanct. St. Epiph 
Hxr. 61. H St. Aug. de Bapt. contra Don. lib. 5. cap. 23. ** In Whitg. Def. p. 103 
ft And his Second Keplv against Whitg. part l.page §4, 85, 86, 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST THE SACRAMENT OF MARRIAGE. 65 



The Book, 


The Vulgate Latin 


t_/llcipiel j 


J. CAli 


and Ver. 




Ephesians, 


Sacramentum, 


c. 5. v. 32. 


fxv^yifiizv, hoc mag- 




num est. 



The true English 
according to the 
Rhemish trans- 
lation. 



This is a great 
sacrament.' 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



This 
secret.' 



great 



The last trans- 
lation of the 
protestant Bi- 
ble,edit. Lon- 
don, an. 1683. 



This is a great 
* mystery.' 



The church of God esteems marriage a holy sacrament, as giving grace to the mar- 
ried persons, to live together in love, concord, and fidelity. But protestants, who reckon 
it no more than a civil contract, as it is amongst infidels, translated this text accordingly, 
calling it, in their first translations, instead of a " great sacrament," or " mystery," as in 
the Greek, a " great secret." 

But we will excuse them for not translating "sacrament," because they pretended 
not to translate the Latin, but the Greek ; yet, however, we must ask them, why they 
call.it not " mystery," as it is in the Greek ? doubtless, they can give us no other rea- 
son, but that they wished only to avoid both those words, which are used in the Latin and 
Greek church, to signify sacrament ; for the word mystery is the same in Greek, that 
sacrament is in Latin : and in the Greek church, the sacrament of the body and blood 
itself, is called by the name of mystery, or mysteries ; so that, if they should have called 
matrimony by that name, it would have sounded equally well as a sacrament also : but in 
saying, " it is a great secret," they are sure it shall not be taken for a sacrament. 

But perhaps they will say, Is not every sacrament and mystery in English, " a secret ?" 
Yes, as angel is a " messenger ;" priest, an " elder ;" apostle, " one that is sent ;" bap- 
tism, " washing ;" evangelist, " a bringer of good news ;" Holy Ghost, " holy wind ;" 
bishop, " overseer or superintendent :" But when the holy Scripture uses these words 
to signify more excellent and divine things than those of the common sort, pray does it 
become translators to use profane, instead of ecclesiastical terms, and thereby to dis- 
grace the writing and meaning of the Holy Ghost. 

The same Greek word, in all other places,* they translated mystery ; who, therefore,, 
can imagine any other reason for the translating of it secret in this place, than lest it 
might seem to make against their heretical opinion, " That marriage is no sacrament ?" 
though the apostle makes it such a mystery, or sacrament, as represents no less than 
the conjunction of Christ and his church, and whatsoever is most excellent in that con- 
junction. 

And St. Augustine teaches, that " A certain sacrament of marriage is commended to 
the faithful that are married ; whereupon the apostle says Husbands, love your wives; 
as Christ loved the church."-j- And Fulk grants, that " Augustine, and some others of 
the Ancient Fathers take it, that matrimony is a great mystery ©f the conjunction of 
Christ and his church ;"t 

But because they have kept to the Greek in their last translation, I shall say no more 
of it ; nor should I indeed have thus much noticed it here, but to show the reader how 
intolera bly partial and crafty they were in their first translations. 



Here follow several heretical ADDITIONS, and other notorious falsifications, &c. 



* 1 Tim. 3. Col. 1. ver. 26. Ephes. 3. ver. 9. 1 Cor. 15. ver. 15, 
f St. Aug. de Nupt. & Concup. lib. 1. c. 10. 
± Fulk, in Rhem. Test, in Ephes. 5. 32. sect. 5, 



9 



66 



PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



("a J Reliqua au- 
tem verborum Joa- 
kim, & abominati- 
onam ejvSy quas 
operatus est & quce 
inventa sunt in eo 
continentur in libro 
regum Judcc &f Is- 
rael. 



fbjEt confun- 
debat Judceos qui 
habitabant Damus- 
ci affirmant quo- 
niatn hie est Chris- 
tus. 



f c J Verbum au- 
tem Domini man- 
et in ceternum ; 
hoc est autem ver- 
bum quod evange- 
lizatum est in vos. 



fdj Major em 
autem dat gratiam. 



The true English 
according to the 
llhemish trans- 
lation. 



fej Sitamen per- 
manetis in fide fun- 
dati, & stabiles, & 
immobiles a spe e- 
vangelii quod, au- 
distis, quod pradi- 
catum est in uni- 
versa creatura quce 
sub caelo est. 



Corruptions in the 
protestant Bi- 
bles, printed A. 
D. 1562, 1577, 
1579. 



But the rest of 
the words of Joa- 
kim, and of his 
abominations 
which he wrought, 
and the things 
that were found in 
him, are contained 
in the book of the 
kings of Judah and 
Israel. 



And confound- 
ed the Jews, &c. 
affirming that this 
is Christ. 



But the word of 
our Lord remain- 
eth for ever : and 
this is the word 
thatis evangelized 
among you. 



And giveth 
greater graces. 



If yet ye con- 
tinue in the faith 
grounded and sta- 
ble, and unmova- 
ble from the hope 
of the Gospel 
which you have 
heard, which *is 
preached among 
all creatures, &c. 



The last Trar^ 
latibn of the 
protestant Bi- 
ble, edit.Lon 
don. an. 1683. 



(a J The rest of 
the acts of Jehoa- 
kin, and his abo- 
minations which 
he did, ' and car- 
ved images that 
were laid to his 
charge,' behold 
they are written in 
the book of the 
kings of Judah and 
Israel. 

fbj Saul con- 
founded the Jews, 
proving * by con- 
ferring one Scrip- 
ture with another,' 
that this is very 
Christ. 



CcJ The word 
of the Lord endu- 
reth for ever : and 
this is the word 
which 'by the Gos- 
pel' was preached 
unto you. 



(dj But 'the 
Scripture' offer- 
eth greater grace. 



(ej If ye con- 
tinue established 
in the faith, and be 
not moved away 
from the hope of 
the Gospel, which 
you have heard, 
' how it was' 
preached. — Or, 
' whereof ye have 
heard 'how that it' 
is preached. — Or, 
' whereof ye have 
heard ' and which i 
hath been' preach- 
ed. 



Corrected. 



Corrected. 



— And this is 
the word, which 
' by the Gospel' 
is preached un- 
to you. 



But * he* giv- 
eth more grace. 



ye 



—Which 
have heard, 
' and which was 
preached to e 
verv creature. 



BY ADDING TO THE TEXT, 



67 



(a J I have not set down these few examples of their additions, as if they were all the 
only places in the Bible that were corrupted after this manner ; for if you observe well 
in the foregoing 1 chapters, you will find both additions and diminutions ; and that so fre* 
quently done, and with such wonderful boldness, as if these translators had been privi- 
leged by especial license to add to, or diminish from, the sacred text at their pleasures : 
or, as if themselves had been only excepted from that general curse denounced against 
all such as either add to, or diminish from it, in the close of the holy Bible (Apocalypse, 
22. ver. 18, 19,) in these words, " For I testify to every one, hearing the words of the 
prophecy of this book : if any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the 
plagues written in this book. And if any man shall diminish of the words of the book 
of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the 
holy city, and of these things that be written in this book." 

Against holy images they maliciously add to the text these words, " Carved images, 
that were laid to his charge." And to what intent is this, but to deceive the ignorant 
reader, and to foment his hatred against the images of Christ, and his saints ? As they 
have done also in another place, (Rom. 11. 4.) where they maliciously add the word 
"image" to the text, where it is not in the Greek, saying, instead of " I have left me 
seven thousand men, who have not bowed their knees to Baal," thus, " I have left me 
seven thousand men, who have not bowed their knee to the image of Baal."* 

(b J "By conferring one Scripture with another:" this is added more than is in the 
Greek, i-n favour of their presumptuous opinion, that the comparing of the Scriptures is 
enough for any man to understand them himself, solely by his own diligence and endea- 
vour; and thereby to reject both the commentaries of the doctors, and the exposition of 
holy councils, and the Catholic church.f 

(c) " By the Gospel :" these words are added deceitfully, and of ill intent, to make 
the simple reader think, that there is no other word of God, but the written word ; for 
the common reader, hearing this word Gospel, conceives nothing else. But indeed all 
is Gospel, whatsoever the apostles taught, either by writing, or by tradition, and word of 
mouth. 

It is written of Luther,* that in his first translation of the Bible into the German 
tongue, he left out these words of the apostle clearly, " This is the word which is evan- 
gelized to you ;" because St. Peter does here define what is the word of God, saying, 
" That which is preached" to you, and not that only which is written. 

(d J In this place they add to the text the words " The Scripture ;" where the apostle 
may as well, and indifferently say, " The Spirit," or " Holy Ghost," gives more graces, 
as is more probable he meant, and is so expounded by many. And so also this last 
translation of theirs intimates, by inserting the word He : " But he giveth more grace :." 
though this is more than they can stand by. But they will never be prevented from in- 
serting their commentary in the text, and restraining the " Holy Ghost" to one particu- 
lar sense, where his words seem to be ambiguous, which the Latin interpreter never 
presumed to do, but always leaves it as open to either signification in the Latin, as he 
found it in the Greek. 

(<?J In this last place they alter the apostle's plain speech with certain words of their 
own; for they will not have him say, "Be immovable in the faith and Gospel, which 
you have heard, which has been preached ;" but, " Whereof you have heard how it was 
preached ;" as thougli lie spoke not of the Gospel preached to them, but of a Gospel 
which they had only heard of, that was preached in the world. 

The apostle exhorts the Colossians to continue gi-ounded in the faith and Gospel, 
which they had heard and received from their first apostles. § But our protestants, who 
with Hymenals and Alexander, and other old heretics, have fallen from their first faith, 
approve not of this exhortation. 

It is certain that these words, " Whereof you have heard how it was preached," are 
not so in the Greek ; but, " Which you have heard which has been preached :" as if it 
were said, that they should continue constant in the faith and Gospel, which themselves 
had received, and which was then preached and received in the whole world. 

In Cor. cap. 14. ver. 4. where it is said, " He that speaketh with tongues, edifieth him- 
self; 55 the Bible printed 1683, translates thus, " He that speaketh in an unknown tongue, 
edifieth himself:" so likewise in the 13, 14, 19, and 27th verses, they make the same addi- 
tion ; so that in this one chapter they add the word " unknown" no less than five times to 
the text, where it is not in the Greek. And this they do, on purpose to make it seem to 
the ignorant people, that mass and other ecclesiastical offices ought not to be said in 
Latin : whereas there is nothing here either written or meant of any other tongues, but 
such as men spoke in the primitive church by miracle ; to wit, barbarous and strange 



* Bible 1562. f Bible 1577. * Lind. Dubitat. p. 88. § 1 Tim. cap. 1. ver. 6. 



6b 



PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS 



tongues, which could not be interpreted commonly, but by the miraculous gift also of 
interpretation : and though also they might by a miracle speak the Latin, Greek, or 
Hebrew tongues ; yet these could not be counted unknown tongues, as being the com- 
mon languages of the world, and of the learned in every city; and in which also the 
Scriptures of the Old and New Testament were written ; which could not be said to 
have been written in an unknown tongue, though they were not penned in the vulgar 
language, peculiar to all people; but in a learned and known speech, capable of being 
interpreted by thousands in every country, though not by every illiterate person. 

I would gladly know from our translators, what moved them to add the word " un- 
known" in some places, and not in others, where the Greek word is the same in all ? for 
instance, in the fifth verse of this chapter, where the apostle wishes that all should 
speak with tongues ; they translate exactly according to the Greek, without adding to 
the text; when in all the other places, where they think there may be some shadow or 
colour of having it meant of the general tongue, and known language of the church, they 
partially, and with a very ill meaning, thrust in the word " unknown." See the annota- 
tions upon this place, in the Rhemish testament. 

Again, Rom. 12. ver. 6, 7. where the apostle's words are, " Having gifts according to 
the grace that is given us, different, either prophecy according to the rule of faith; or 
ministry, in ministering ; or he that teaches, in doctrine they, h)' .adding several words 
of their own, not found in the Greek, and altering- others, make the text run thus — 
" Having then gifts, differing according to the grace that is given us, whether prophecy 
(let us prophesy) according to the proportion of faith ; or ministry (let us wait on our) 
ministering; or he that teaches on teaching." 

Besides their additions here, they pervert the text, by changing the word " rule" of 
faith into " proportion" of faith ; whereby they would have their readers to gather no 
more from this place, than only that their new ministers are to prophesy or preach, and 
wait on their ministering, according to the measure or proportion of faith or ability, less 
or more, that they are endued with. Whereas by this text, as also by many other places 
of Holy Writ, we may gather that the apostles, by inspiration of the Holy Ghost, before 
they divided themselves into divers nations, made among themselves a certain rule and 
form of faith and doctrine, containing not only the twelve articles of the creed, but all 
other principles, grounds, and the whole platform of the Christian religion ; which rule 
was before any of the books of the New Testament were written, and before the faith 
was preached among the Gentiles; by which rule not only the doctrine of all other infe- 
rior teachers was to be tried, but also the preaching, writing, and interpreting, which is 
here called prophesying, of the apostles and evangelists themselves, were by God's 
church approved and" admitted, or reproved and rejected according to this rule of faith. 
This form or rule every apostle delivered by word of mouth, not by Scripture, to the 
country by them converted, which was also by the apostolical men, and those who re- 
ceived it entire from the apostles, delivered also entire to the next following age ; which 
also receiving it from them, delivered it as they had received it, to the succeeding age, 
&.c. till this our present age. 

And this is the true analogy of faith, set down and commended to us every where for 
apostolical tradition ; and not the fantastical rule or square, which every ministerial guide, 
according to his great or small proportion of faith, pretends to gather out of the Scrip- 
tures, as understood by his own private spirit, and wrested to his heretical purpose ; by 
which he will presume to judge of, and censure the fathers, councils, church, yea, the 
Scripture itself. In the primitive church, as also in the church of God, at this day, all 
teaching, preaching, and prophesying is not measured according to the proportion of 
every man's private and public spirit, but by this rule of faith, first set down and deliver- 
ed by the apostles : and therefore whatsoever novelties or prophesyings will not abide 
this test, they are justly, by the apostles, condemned, as contrary and against the rule of 
faith thus delivered. 

I cannot omit taking notice, in this place, of two " notorious and gross corruptions" in 
their first translation, seeing they much concern the church of England's "priesthood:" 
the first is in Acts i. verse 26. where, instead of saying " He, Matthias, was numbered 
with the eleven ;" they translate it, " He was, by a common consent, counted with the 
eleven." The other, already mentioned, is Acts 14, verse 22. where, for, " When they 
had ordained to them priests in every church," they say, " When they had ordained 
elders by election in every congregation." In one of these texts, the words, " By a com- 
mon consent," and in the other, " By election," are added on purpose to make the 
Scripture speak in defence of their making superintendants and elders by election only, 
without consecration and ordination, by imposition of hands : by which corrupt additions 
it evidently appears to have been the doctrine of the church of England, in those days, 
that election only, without consecration, was sufficient to make bishops and priests. 



/ 



BY ADDING TO THE TEXT, 



S9 



But in their last translation, made in the beginning of* king- James the First's reign, 
they have corrected these places, by expunging the words formerly added. And this 
was done by the bishops and clergy, for their great honour, dignity, and authority ; 
knowing that consecration, which they thought now high time to pretend to, must needs 
elevate them much above the sphere of a bare election, in which they formerly moved, 
And, perhaps, another no less prevalent reason was, that they might more securely fix 
themselves in their bishoprics and benefices ; thinking, perhaps, that bishops consecrated, 
might pretend to that jure divino, which men only elected by the congregation or prince, 
held at the mercy and good liking of the electors : what other motives induced them to 
this, matters not. However, they thought it now convenient to pretend to something 
more than a bare election ; to wit, to receive an episcopal and priestly character, by the 
imposition of hands : whereas we find not, that their predecessors, Parker, Jewel, Horn, 
&c. ever pretended to any other character, but what they received by the queen's let- 
ters patent, election, and an act of parliament ; as is plain from the 23d and 25th of their 
39 articles, as well as from the statute 8 Eliz. 1. and therefore were content to have the 
Scripture read, " He was, by a common consent, counted with the eleven ;" and, " When 
they had ordained elders by election."* 

And whereas our present ministerial guides of the church of England, would gladly 
have people to believe them to have a succession of bishops, from the apostolic times to 
this day; yet so far was Messrs. Parker, Jewel, and the rest of their first bishops, from 
pretending to any such episcopal succession, "if they had been truly consecrated, they 
must of necessity have owned and maintained a succession among them," that, on the 
contrary, they published and preached many things to discredit the same : and to that 
purpose, falsified and corrupted the Scripture against succession, for in the Defence of 
the Apology of the church of England, they write thus,- — " By succession Christ saith, 
that desolation shall sit in the holy place, and antichrist shall press into the room of 
Christ;" for proof of which, they note in the margin, Mat. xxiv. And in another place 
of the same Defence, they say of succession; St. Paul says to the faithful at Ephesus, 
" I know that after my departure hence, ravening wolves shall enter and succeed me ; 
and out of yourselves there shall, by succession, spring up men speaking perversely 
whereas St. Paul has never a word about succession or succeeding; nor is succession 
named in the 24th of St. Matthew.p So that you see, the first bishops of the church of 
England, not only corrupted the sacred text, in translating many places of the Bible 
against ordination ; but also in their other writings, falsified the Scripture with their cor- 
rupt additions against succession. t Two sufficient reasons for us to believe, that they 
neither had nor pretended to either consecration, or episcopal succession in those days ; 
consequently were not consecrated at Lambeth, by such as had received their consecra- 
tion and character from Roman catholic bishops, who claim it no otherwise than by an 
uninterrupted succession from the apostles, and so from Christ. And this obliges me to. 
digress a little into 



* Dr. Tenison and A. B. in the Speculum Considered, p. 49, tell us, " That, in the 
church of England, they have a succession of bishops continued down from the apostolic 
times to this day : but to name or number them," they say, " is neither necessary nor 
useful:" they might have added, nor possible. 

f See the % Defence of the Apol. p. 132, and 127. 

i The first protestant bishops and clergy were so far from pretending to either conse- 
cration or succession, that they corrupted the Scripture against both. 



76 



PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS 



SOME CONSIDERATIONS ON THOSE LAMBETH RECORDS, 



By -which Protestant Bishops endeavour to prove the Consecration of their first Archbishop 
of Canterbury, Dr. Matthew Parker. 

* In the beginning of king- James the First's reign, a new translation of the Bible be- 
ing- undertaken, the said falsifications of Scripture corrected, and a full resolution put 
on of assuming to themselves the character of consecrated bishops and priests ; they 
thought it absolutely necessary to derive this character from such bishops as had been, 
as they thought, consecrated by Roman catholic bishops ; by whose hands they would 
now make the world believe, the first of their predecessors, Matthew Parker, was con- 
secrated with great solemnity at Lambeth. To which purpose, they presume to obtrude 
upon the world certain, before unheard of, records or registers. But the age in which 
the sun first shone upon these records, viz. anno 1613, not being so easily imposed upon, 
as was expected, the said Lambeth register became suspected, and, for divers reasons, 
detected as a forged instrument. Fitz-Herbert, a man of great sincerity and authority, 
wrote against these Lambeth records, in the very year that Mr. Mason, workman to Dr. 
Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury, first published them to the world. These are his 
words :| " It was my chance to understand, that one Mr. Mason lately published a book, 
wherein he endeavours to prove the consecration of the first protestant bishops, by a 
register, testifying, that four bishops consecrated Matthew Parker, the first archbishop 
of Canterbury. Thou shalt therefore understand, good reader, that this our exception, 
touching the lawful vocation and consecration of the first protestant bishops in the late 
queen's day, is not a new quarrel, now lately raised ; but vehemently urged divers times 
heretofore, by many other catholics, many years ago ; yea, in the very beginning of the 
late queen's reign : as namely, by two learned doctors, Harding and Stapleton, who 
mightily pressed them with the defect of due vocation and consecration, urging them to 
prove the same, and to show how, and by whom they were made priests and bishops." 
Thus he. 

And to give you the words of the said doctors : thus writes Dr. Harding to Mr. Jewel, 
pretended bishop of Salisbury : — " It remains, Mr. Jewel, you tell us, whether your vo- 
cation be ordinary or extraordinary : if it be ordinary, show us the letters of your orders : 
at least, show us that you have received power to do the office you presume to exercise, 
by the due order of laying on of hands, and consecration : but order and consecration 
you have none : for which of all these new ministers, howsoever else you call them, 
could give that to you, which he has not himself?" These are his very words to Mr. 
Jewel ; having but a little before urged him, also in the words of Tert.ullian, thus : — 
" You know what Tertullian says of such as you be, Edayit origines ecclesiarum snarum ; 
we say likewise to you, Mr. Jewel ; and what we say to you, we say to each one of your 
companions : tell us the original, and first spring of your church ; show us the register 
of your bishops continually succeeding one another from the beginning ; so as that the 
first bishop may have some one of the apostles, or of the apostolical men, for his author 
and predecessor^ Sec. Therefore, says he, to go from your succession, which you can- 
not prove, and to come to your vocation : how say you, sir ? you bear yourself, as though 
you were bishop of Salisbury : but how can you prove your vocation ? by what authority 
usurp you the administration of doctrine and sacraments ? what can you allege for the 
right and proof of your ministry ? who has called you ? who has laid hands on you ? by 
what example has he done it ? how, and by whom, are you consecrated ? who has sent 
you ? who has committed to you the office you take upon you," &c. In this manner was 
Mr. Jewel urged : to all which he never replied, by sending Dr. Harding to any register 
of his, or his metropolitan's consecration : or by telling him, that their consecration at 
Lambeth, was upon record : or that they had authentic testimonies to show who imposed 



* The Lambeth Records Considered. 

f See Fitzherbert's Appendix to the Discovery of Dr. Andrews' Absurdities, Falsities 
and Lies, printed anno 1613. 

+ We also, at this day, still urge our protestant bishops to prove their succession. But 
they, instead of doing it, wave us off with these words, " To name or number our bishops, 
is neither useful nor necessary." Vid. Supr. 



BY ADDING TO THE TEXT, 



73 



hands upon them. And how easily had such answers been given to these hard questions, 
if there had then been extant any authentic register or records of his own, or of Mat- 
thew Parker's consecration at Lambeth ? 

After the same manner he is set upon by Dr. Stapleton, in his answer to Mr. Jewel's 
book, entitled, A Reply, &c. " How chanced then, Mr. Jewel,". says he, " that you and 
your fellows, bearing yourselves for bishops, have not so much as this congruity and con- 
sent ; I will not say of the pope, but of any Christian bishops at all, throughout all Chris- 
tendom ; neither are liked and allowed by any one of them all ; but have taken upon 
you that office, without any imposition of hands, without all ecclesiastical authority, 
without all order of canons and right ? I ask not, who gave you bishoprics, but who made 
you bishops ?" Thus he to Jewel.* 

And thus again, in his Counter-blast against Horn, pretended bishop of Winchester : 
"Is it not notorious," says he to Horn, " that you and your colleagues, Parker, &c. were 
not ordained according to the prescript, I will not say of the church, but even of the 
very statutes ? how then can you challenge to yourself the name of the lord bishop of 
Winchester ?" And in another place he urges Mr. Horn with his " Being without any 
consecration at all of his metropolitan, Parker ; himself, poor man," says he, " being no 
bishop neither." Who, I say once again, can imagine, that Jewel and Horn should have 
been so careless of their character and honour, as not to have produced their Lambeth 
register and records, if any such authentic writings had then been extant, when not only 
their own credit, but even the credit of their metropolitan, Parker, and all the rest of 
Queen Elizabeth's new bishops ; yea, the whole succession of that race, were so misera- 
bly shipwrecked ? yea, in how great stead would such Lambeth writings have stood Mr. 
Horn, when he durst not join issue with bishop Bonner upon the plea, " That he was no 
bishop when he tendered Bonner the oath of supremacy." 

The case was thus :f by the first session of that parliament, 5 Eliz. 1. power was giv- 
en to any bishop in the realm, to tender the oath of supremacy, enacted 1 Eliz. to any 
ecclesiastical person within his diocese ; and the refuser was to incur a premunire. By 
virtue of this statute, Mr. Robert Horn, pretended bishop of Winchester, tenders the 
oath to doctor Bonner, bishop of London, but deprived by queen Elizabeth, and then a 
prisoner in the Marshalsea, which was within the diocese of Winchester : Bonner refuses 
to take it. Horn certifies his refusal into the King's Bench ; whereupon Bonner was in- 
dicted upon the statute. He prays judgment, whether he might not give in evidence 
upon this issue, Quod ipse non est hide culpabilis, eo quod dictus episcopus de Winchester,, 
non fiat episcopus tempore oblationis sacramenti. " That he was not culpable, because the 
said Horn, called bishop of Winchester, was not bishop when he tendered him the oath." 
And it was resolved by all the judges at Sergeant's-Inn, in judge Cattlin, the chief jus- 
tice's chamber, "That if the verity and matter be so, indeed, he should well be received to 
give in evidence upon this issue, and the jury should try it." Now, what the trial was 
appears by that he was not condemned, nor ever any further troubled for that case s 
though he was a man especially aimed at. And at the next sessions of that parliament, 
which was the 8th of Elizabeth, they were forced for want, you see, of a better charac- 
ter, to beg they might be declared bishops by act of parliament. 

Besides it is no more credible, that such knowing and conscientious men, as Dr. Sta- 
pleton, Dr. Harding, Constable, Kellison, &.c. then living in England, and probably at 
London, would question so public and solemn an action ; than it is, that a sober man 
should now call in doubt king James the second's coronation at Westminster ; or ask in 
print, who set the crown upen his head, pretending he had never been crowned. 

But in answer to these our objections ; Dr. Bramhall falsely affirms, that the said re- 
cords were spoken of in the eighth year of queen Elizabeth : for proof of which, he 
would gladly have the world so grossly to mistake the words of the statute of the 8th of 
Eliz. as to think that the mention there made of the records " of her majesty's father and 
brother's time, and also for her own time," have relation to their Lambeth register : 
whereas by the records there spoken of, is understood only the records of her father's, 
brother's, and her own letters patent ; and not their then unknown Lambeth register. 

But Dr. Bramhall, to make his good his false assertion, and to impose upon the unwary 
reader, most egregiously falsifies the words of the said statute; saying, " The sta- 
tute speaks expressly of the records of elections, and confirmations and consecra- 
tions but you will find in the said statute, expressly these words, " As by her majes- 
ty's said letters patent, remaining on record, more plainly will appear." Which, if at- 



* See Stapleton's Return of Untruths, his Challenge to Jewel and Horn, and his 
Counterblast against Horn, f See Abridg. of Dyer's Reports, fol. 234. \ In this statute 
is expressly mentioned her majesty's "Father's and brother's letters patent ; " as also, 
" her own remaining on record." 



72 



PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS 



tentively considered, is sufficient to convince the reader, that " The records of her ma- 
jesty's said father's and brother's time, and also of her own time," relate not to any re- 
cords or registers of the archbishop of Canterbury ; but only to the records of the king's 
and queen's letters patent. This device of Bramhall is more fully answered and refuted 
by the author of the " Nullity of the Prelatical Clergy of England ;" whither I will refer 
my reader. 

Again, protestants tell us further,* that there is a register of their bishops, found in a 
book called " Parker's Antiquitates Britannicae ;" which I deny not : But to this I an- 
swer, that the said register is forged and foisted into Parker's Antiq. Britan. For that 
edition, printed anno 1605, is the first that ever mentioned any such thing: the old ma- 
nuscript of that book, having no such register at all in it ; as a learned authorf who dili- 
gently examined the same, affirms in these words — " In the old manuscript of that book, 
Park. Antiq. Brit, which 1 have seen, and diligently examined, there is not any mention 
or memorial at all of any such register or consecration of Mat. Parker, or any of those 
pretended protestant bishops, as the obtruded register speaks of. And any man reading 
the printed book, will easily see, that it is a mere foisted and inserted thing ; having no 
connection, correspondence, or affinity, either w r ith that which goes before or follows : 
and contains more things done after Mat. Parker had written that book." Yet this 
very register mentions not any certain place or form of their consecration : so that it 
might be performed as well at the Nag's head, as at Lambeth. And indeed, we deny 
them not to have had a certain kind of puritanical consecration, by John Scorey, at the 
Nag's head in Cheapside ; but we deny the said Nag's head consecration to be either 
valid or legal, both for defect in the form, and in the minister ; John Scorey himself be- 
ing no bishop, no more than Barlow and Coverdale, as is hinted above. By reason 
of which defects, the queen, it seems, was forced afterwards to declare, or make 
them bishops by act of parliament. But to pass by these things, and to come to a closer 
examination of their Lambeth records. t 

Mr. Mason, the very first man that ever told us of this Lambeth register, urges it in 
this manner,§ "Queen Mary died in the year 1558, the 17th of November ; the same day 
died Cardinal Pool, archbishop of Canterbury ; and the very same day was queen Eliza- 
beth proclaimed. The 15th of January next following, w as the day of queen Elizabeth's 
coronation, when Dr. Oglethorp, bishop of Carlisle, was so happy as to set the diadem 
of that kingdom upon her royal head. Now the see of Canterbury continued void till 
December following; about which time the dean and chapter having received the conge 
d'elire, elected master Parker for their archbishop, Juxta morem antiquum & laudabilem 
consuetudinem ccclesix pr<zdictce ab antiquo usitatam & inconcussa observatam, proceeding 
in this election according to the ancient manner, and the laudable custom of the afore- 
said church ;" citing for these words, his new-found register, ex regist. Mat. Parker. 
" After which election, orderly performed, and signified according to the law, it pleased 
her highness to send her letters patent of commission, for his confirmation and consecra- 
tion, to seven bishops ;" whose names, with as much of the commission as is necessary, 
he sets down ; after which he tells us, "that to take away all scruple, he will faithfully 
deliver out of authentical records," as he calls them, putting in the margin ex regist. 
M. Parker, with as much confidence, as if they had been made known to the world, and 
published or produced upon all occasions, for fifty years together, before ever he spoke 
t>f them, "both the day when he, Mr. Parker, was consecrated, and by whom, viz. 

C William Barlow. 

Anno 1559. Mat. Park. Cant. cons. 17. Decemb. By <j Mdes Coverdale. 

l^John Hodgkins." 

These are Mr. Mason's obtruded records ; with which let us compare the words of an- 
other recorder, Dr. Bramhall, who after having told us Mat. Parker's being by conge 
d> elite, elected archbishop of Canterbury, says, || " The queen accepting this election, was 
graciously pleased to issue out two commissions for the legal confirmation of the said 
election, and consecrating of the said archbishop : the former dated the 9th of Septem- 
ber, anno 1559, directed to six bishops; Cuthbert, bishop of Durham; Gilbert, bishop 
of Bath; David, bishop of Peterborough; Anthony, bishop of Landaff ; William Barlow, 
bishop ; and John Scorey, bishop." Which commission he sets down at large, from Ro. 



* Antiq. Brit. edit. Hanov. 1605. \ The author of a book, called " The Judgment of 
the Apostles and first Age, in Points of Doctrine," &c. printed in the year 1633. See 
pag. 209, 211, and 394. % Stat. 1. 8 Eliz. § Mason, lib. 3. p, 126. \\ Bram. p. 83, 



BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 



73 



par. 2. 1. Eli z. Dated, Apud Redgrave, nono die Septembris anno regni Elizabeths An* 
glice, &c. primo. 

Per breve de privato sigillo 

Examinatur Ri. BROUGHTON, 

Then he goes on,* " Now if any man desire a reason why this first commission was not 
executed, the best account I can give him is this, that it was directed to six bishops^ 
without an " Aut minus, or at the least four of you ;" so as if any one of the six were 
sick, or absent, or refused, the rest could not proceed to confirm or consecrate. And 
that some of them did refuse, I am very apt to believe, because three of them, not long 
after, were deprived :" Thus Dr. B ram hall. 

The three bishops, he means, that were, as he would have us believe, " Shortly after 
deprived," were Cuthbert Tunstal, bishop of Durham ; Gilbert Bourn, bishop of Bath ; 
and David Pole, bishop of Peterborough. But, according" to John Stow,f and Hollins- 
head, these three bishops, with other ten or eleven, all catholics, were deprived and de- 
posed from their sees, in July before, for refusing the oath of supremacy. " In the 
month of July," says Stdw, " the old bishops of England, then living, were called and 
examined by certain of the queen's majesty's council, where the bishops of York, Ely, 
and London, with others, to the number of thirteen or fourteen, for refusing to take the 
oath, touching the queen's supremacy, and other articles, were deprived of their 
bishoprics." Hollinshead has also the same words, and tells us further who succeeded 
in their rooms and places. 

Hollinshead, in the praises of bishop Tunstal of Durham, has these words : " He was„ 
by the noble queen Elizabeth, deprived of his bishopric, &c. and was committed to 
Matthew Parker, bishop of Canterbury, who used him very honourably, both for the 
gravity, learning, and age of the said Tunstal : but he, not long remaining under the 
ward of the said bishop, did shortly after, the 18th of November, in the year 1559, de- 
part this life at Lambeth, where he first received his consecration." By this it appears, 
that Matthew Parker was bishop of Canterbury, and lived in the bishop's palace at Lam- 
beth, consequently installed in the bishopric, which he could not be before he was con- 
secrated, if consecration was then used ; and all this before the 18th of November, 1559. 

And well might he, by this time, be in the full enjoyment and possession of the 
bishopric of Canterbury ; for by Stow and Hollinshead, we find him called bishop elect 
on the 9th of September, when he and others assisted at the king of France's obsequies. 
Yea, by Hollinshead it evidently appears, that they were elected immediately, or, how- 
ever, very shortly after the deprivation of the old catholic bishops : for, on the 12th of 
August, we find Doctor Grindall not only called bishop elect, but exercising as much 
power, as if he had been more than only elect. His words are these : " On the 12th of 
August, being Saturday, the high altar in Paul's church, with the rood, and the images 
of Mary and John, standing in the rood-loft, were taken down ; and this was done by 
the command of Doctor Grindall, newly elected bishop of London." 

The truth of what I have here set down from Hollinshead and Stow, is unquestiona- 
ble : but if it agree not with Mr. Mason, and Doctor Bramhall, and their Lambeth re- 
cords, shall we not have just cause to re ject these as forged ? But, before we compare 
them together, let us first see what accordance and agreement is found among the records 
and recorders themselves. 

First, in the queen's letters patent, or commission for consecrating Matthew Parker,^ 
the suffragan bishop, there mentioned, is named Richard, suffragan of Bedford : whereas 
by Mr. Mason and others, he is called John : yea, Mason calls him John in one place, 
and Richard in another. I suppose those, who made these records, might be ignorant 
of the said suffragan's name ; and therefore for making sure work, call him sometimes 
Richard, sometimes John : but if these records had been made while the man himself 
was living, and when he imposed hands on Matthew Parker, he could have satisfied them 
of his true name, and the place where he was suffragan, viz. whether of Bedford or Do- 
ver ? And whether there was any other suffragan there besides himself, if we suppose 
that the Lambeth Notarius Publicus could be ignorant of such circumstances. 

Secondly, Mr. SutchfF affirms, that Parker was consecrated by Barlow, Coverdale, 
Scorey, and two suffragans. But by our pretended register, we find but one suffragan 
at that solemnity. § 



* Bram. page 85. 

f See John Stow and Hollinshead, in an. 1. Eliz, 

*• See D. Bram. p. 87, 89, 90. 

§ Sutcliff against Dr. Kellison, p. 5, 

to 



FROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS 



Thirdly, Mr. Mason, and his records, stile him suffragan of Bedford : but by Doctor 
Butler he is called suffragan of Dover.* 

Fourthly, in Mr. Mason, we hear tell but of one commission from the queen, for the 
conformation and consecration of Matthew Parker. But Bramhall, by more diligent 
search among the records, finds two ; the first dated September the 9th.f 

Fifthly, by which commission it appears, Parker was elected before the 9th of Sep- 
tember : but Mr. Mason says, he was elected about the beginning of December. 

Thus they concur one with another : and to compare them with Richard Hollinshead, 
and John Stow's chronicles, they jump as exactly, as if the one had been written at 
China, and the other at Lambeth : for, 

Sixthly, Mr. Mason, I say, affirms, that the dean and chapter elected Doctor Matthew 
Parker about the month of December. But in Stow and Hollinshead, we find him and 
others called bishops elect, on the 9th of September. Yea, seeing Hollinshead calls 
Grindall newly elect on the 12th of August, we may easily conclude, that Matthew Par- 
ker, the metropolitan, was also elected before that time ; which, you see, is about four 
months before Mason's election by Conge d'Elire. 

Seventhly, Mr. Mason affirms, that the see of Canterbury continued void till Decem- 
ber, 1559. On the 17"th of which month, according to the New Register, Parker was 
consecrated. But in Hollinshead we find, that Matthew Parker was bishop of Canter- 
bury, and lived in the bishop's palace at Lambeth, where he had bishop Tunstal commit- 
ted, prisoner, to his charge, long before the 17th of December : for on the 18th of No- 
vember, 1559, the said bishop Tunstal died. 

Eighthly, Doctor Bramhall, as is said, from our new-made records, brings us a com- 
mission, dated on the 9th of September, 1559. And directed, besides others, to three 
catholic bishops, Cuthbert Tunstal, Gilbert Bourn, and David Pool, requiring them to 
confirm and consecrate Matthew Parker. And has the confidence to affirm, that " The 
said three bishops were shortly after deprived of their bishoprics, as he is very apt to 
believe, for refusing to obey the said commission." But in Stow and Hollinshead we 
find, that the said three catholic bishops, with ten or eleven others, were deprived of 
their bishoprics in the month of July before, for refusing the oath of supremacy : and 
Mason himself confirms this, by acknowledging they were deprived not long after the 
feast of St. John the Baptist : for which he also cites Saunders, lib. de Schismale Angh 
But, pray, consider, sirs, what can be more absurd, than to imagine that queen Elizabeth 
would be beholden to such Roman catholic bishops, as she had formerly deprived of 
their bishoprics, and made prisoners, for the confirming and consecrating of her new 
protestant bishops, who were to be " unlawfully intruded" into their sees ; especially 
she having, as Bramhall says, protestant bishops enough of her own ; or if such had been 
wanting, might, he says, have easily had store of bishops out of Ireland, to have done 
the work ? 

Pray, give me leave to demand of our English prelates, why this first commission was 
by the queen directed to those three zealous catholic bishops, and not rather to her 
own protestant bishops, to whom she directed the last commission, dated December 6 ? 
Her majesty was not ignorant that their consciences had been too tender to permit them 
to swear herself head of the church of England : and that rather than gall their so ten- 
der consciences, they were content to lose their bishoprics, and suffer perpetual impri- 
sonment : could she, upon revolving this in her princely thoughts, easily imagine that 
they would, without all scruple, impose hands on her newly elected bishops, whom 
they knew to be of a religion as far different from themselves, as king Edward the Vlth 
was from queen Mary's ? Could she suppose, that they would make bishops in that 
church, whereof themselves refused to be members ? Could she think, that those catho- 
lic bishops would consecrate Parker, according to king Edward the Vlth's form of con- 
secration, which they had in queen Mary's days declared to be invalid and null ; and which, 
at this time, was also illegal ? Or could the queen easily imagine, that Matthew Parker and 
the rest of her chosen bishops, who had stood so much upon their punctilios at Frankfort, 
would receive consecration by a form condemned as superstitious and antichristian ; and 
from which, as Mason says, they had pared away so many superfluities ; yea, so many, 
as even to pare out the very name, itself, of bishop ? Let the impartial reader consider 
these things. 

How our present pretended bishops themselves will make all these things agree, will 
be hard to imagine ; which, if they cannot do, let them be content to leave us to our 
own liberties, and freedom of thought ; and to excuse us, if we freely affirm, that "Mat- 
thew Parker was never consecrated at Lambeth : that the said records are forged : and 
that themselves are but mere laymen, without mission, without succession, without con- 
secration." 



Butler Ep, de Consecrat. Minist 



f Bram. p. 83 r 



BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 



Ninthly, it is none of the least objections against Parker's solemn consecration at Lam- 
beth, that we find it not once mentioned by the historians of those times, especially by 
John Stow, who professed so particular a kindness and respect for Parker ; and who 
was so exact in setting 1 down all things, of far less moment, done about London. Doubt- 
less he omitted it not through negligence or forgetfulness, seeing he is not unmindful 
to set down the consecration of cardinal Pole, Parker's immediate predecessor, and the 
very day on which he said his first mass. Nor does it appear to have been through for- 
getfulness, that Hollinshead mentions not this notorious Lambeth solemnity, seeing he 
tells us, that bishop Tunstal, who died under Parker's custody, " received his consecra- 
tion at Lambeth :" if either he or John Stow had but given us only such a short hint as this, 
of Parker's consecration at Lambeth, we should never have questioned it further, nor 
have doubted of the truth of it, though they had not been so exact to a hair in every 
punctilio, as to have told us of the chapel's being " adorned with tapestry towards the 
east ; a red cloth on the floor, in advent : a sermon, communion, concourse of people ; 
Miles Coverdale's side woollen gown : of the queen's sending to see if all things had 
been rightly performed :" what care was here taken ! " Of answer being brought her, 
that there was not a tittle amiss, only Miles Coverdale was in his side woollen gown, at 
the very minute of the consecration : of their assuring her that that could not cause any 
defect in the consecration," &c. as our records mention ; which ridiculous circumstances 
render them not a whit the more credible.* 

If now, from what has been said, these Lambeth records appear evidently to be forged, 
to what other refuge will these pretenders to episcopacy have recourse for their episco- 
pal character, but to queen Elizabeth s letters patent, and an act of parliament ? If so, I 
see no great reason why they should find fault with their ancient name and title of par- 
liamentary bishops. Who ever read of bishops, between St. Peter's time and Parker's, 
that stood in need of an act of parliament to declare them such ? Doubtless, if they had 
been consecrated at Lambeth by imposition of the hands of true bishops, though all their 
consecrators had been in side woollen gowns, and neither tapestry towards the east, nor 
red cloth on the floor of the chapel, and could have shown authentic records of the same, 
they would never have desired the queen to make and declare them bishops by act of 
parliament : nor would the queen, and the wisdom of the nation, have consented to the 
making of such a superfluous act, if their reverences had desired it. No ! no ! there 
would have been no more need of any such act for them then, than there had been for 
three score and nine preceding archbishops of Canterbury. 

After all this, another query will yet arise ; to wit, by what form of consecration Mat- 
thew Parker was consecrated ? Our present prelates and clergy will not say, I suppose, 
that he was made bishop according to the Roman Catholic form, though queen Eliza- 
beth had revived the act of 25 Henry VIII. 20. which authorized the same. Nor can 
they say that king Edward the Vlth's form was then in being, in the eye of the law ; 
for that part of the act of Edward the Vlth which established the book of ordination, 
having been repealed by queen Mary, was not revived till six years after the pretended 
consecration of Matthew Parker, viz. till the 8th of Elizabeth, as is easily proved. For 
whereas the act of 5 and 6 Edward VI. 1. consisted of two parts ; one, which authorized 
the Book of Common Prayer, as it was then newly explained and perfected : another, 
which established the form of consecrated bishops, &c. and added to the Book of Com- 
mon Prayer. This act, as to both these parts, was repealed 1 queen Mary ; and this re- 
peal was reversed 1 Elizabeth, 1. as to that part which concerned the Book of Common 
Prayer only : for so runs the act, " The said statute of repeal, and every thing therein 
contained, only, concerning the said Book, viz. of Common Prayer, authorized by Ed- 
ward VI. shall be void, and of no effect." And afterward^ 8 Elizabeth, 1. was revived 
that other part of it, which concerned the form of ordination, viz. in these words, " Such 
order and form for the consecrating of archbishops, bishops, &c. as was set forth in the 
time of Edward VI. and added to the said Book of Common Prayer, and authorized 5 
and 6 of Edward VI. shall stand, and be in full force ; and shall from henceforth be used 
and observed." By which it is as clear as the sun at noon-day, that Edward the Vlth's 
form was not restored at all by 1 Elizabeth, either expressly or in general terms, under 
the name and notion of the Book of Common Prayer, as protestants would have it 
thought. Nay, rather it was formally excluded by the said act, 1 Elizabeth. For that 
act of Edward VI. consisting of nothing else but the authorizing of the Book of Common 
Prayer, and establishing, and adding to it the book of ordination : and the act of queen 
Mary having repealed that whole act, as to both these parts, that act of 1 Elizabetli re- 
rersing that repeal, as to the Book of Common Prayer only, did plainly and directly ex- 



* Several ridiculous circumstances mentioned in the records, which yet rendg: them 
less credible, 



76 



PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS 



elude the repealing of it, as to the book of ordination ; there being nothing else to be 
excluded, by that word oxir, but that book. So that it is undeniably evident, that king 
Edward the Vlth's form of consecration was at that day illegal. And must we imagine, 
that the queen would suffer her new bishops to be consecrated by an illegal form, when 
she could as easily have authorized it by the law, as she had done the Roman form, by 
reviving the act 25 Henry VIII. 20 ? Yea, it had been as easy to make that form legal, 
as it was afterwards to declare them bishops by act of parliament ; and, doubtless, more 
commendable. 

But admit Matthew Parker, and the rest of queen Elizabeth's new bishops, were 
made such by this, then illegal, form ; yet, if this form prove invalid, they are but still 
where they were before their election, as to their character. And that it is invalid, is 
sufficiently and clearly proved by the learned author of Erastus Senior, to whom I will 
refer my reader. Yea, the protestant bishops and clergy themselves have judged the said 
form to be invalid ; and therefore thought necessary to repair the essential defects of 
the same, by adding the words bishop and priest. Essential defects, I call the want of 
these two words, bishop and priest ; for if they had not been essential, why were they 
added ? Yet this will not serve their turn ; for before they can have a true clergy, they 
must change the character of the ordainers, as well as the form of ordination. A valid 
form of ordination, pronounced by a minister not validly ordained, gives no more charac- 
ter than if it had continued still invalid, and never been altered. The present protest- 
ant bishops, who changed the form of their own consecration upon their adversaries ob- 
jections of the invalidity thereof, (for immediately after Erastus Senior was published 
against it, they altered it, viz. anno 1662) might as well submit to be ordained by ca- 
tholic bishops ; or else, with the presbyterians, utterly deny an episcopal character, as 
allow, by altering the form after so long time and dispute, that it was not sufficient to 
make themselves, and their predecessors, priests and bishops. 

What has hitherto been said, concerning the nullity of their character, is yet further 
confirmed by their altering the 25th of their 39 articles : for these first bishops, Parker, 
Horn, Jewel, Grindall, &c. understanding the condition in which they were, for want of 
consecration by imposition of hands, resolved, in their convocation, anno 1562, to publish 
the 39 Articles, made by Cranmer and his associates, but with some alteration and addi- 
tion ; especially to that article wherein they speak of the sacraments: for, 

Whereas Cranmer's 25th or 26th article says nothing of holy orders by imposition of 
hands, or any visible sign or ceremony required therein; Parker, and his bishops, having 
taken upon themselves that calling, without any such ceremony of imposition and epis- 
copal hands, for I believe they set not much by John Scorey's hands and Bible in the 
Naggs-Head, declared, that "God ordained not any visible sign or ceremony for the. 
five last, commonly called sacraments ;" whereof holy orders is one. This alteration and 
addition you may see in doctor Heylin's Appendix to Ecclesia Restaurata, page 189. — 
In this convocation they denied also holy orders to be a sacrament ; consequently not 
likely to impress any indelible character in the soul of the party ordained : which doc- 
trine continued long among them, as appears by Mr. Rogers, in his Defence of the 39~ 
Articles, who affirms, that " None but disorderly papists will say that order is a sacra- 
ment ;" and demands, " Where can it be seen, in Holy Scripture, that orders or priest- 
hood is a sacrament? what form has it ? (says he) what promise ? what institution from 
Christ ?"* But after they began to pretend to have received an episcopal character 
from Roman catholic bishops, and to put out their Lambeth records in defence of it, they 
disliked this doctrine, and taught the contrary, viz. that ordination is a sacrament. * We 
deny not ordination to be a sacrament," says doctor Bramhall, " though it be not one of 
these two which are generally necessary to salvation. "f 

By order of this convocation the Bible of 1562 was printed, where the aforesaid text, 
« When they had ordained to them priests," &c. was translated, " When they had or- 
dained elders by election ;" which, as soon as they began to thirst after the glorious 
character of priests and bishops, they corrected. 

And though Cranmer cared as little for any visible signs, imposition of hands, or cere- 
monies in ordination, as the other first protestant reformers, and according to their prac- 
tice had abjured the priestly and episcopal character, which he had received among 
catholics, as may be gathered by his words, related by Fox in his Degradation, thus : 
"Then a barber 'clipped his hair round about, and the bishop scraped the tops of his 
fingers, where he had been anointed." + When they were thus doing ; " All this," quoth 
the archbishop, " needed not, I had myself done with this geer long ago." And also 
by his doctrine ; that, " In the New Testament, he that is appointed to be a priest or 



* Defence of the 39 Articles, page 154, 155, 
i Fox's Act and Monuments, fol, 216, 



f See Mason and Dr. Bram. page 97. 



3Y ADDING TO THE TEXT. 



? 7 



bishop, needs no confirmation by the Scripture; for election thereunto is sufficient." 
Though, I say, Cranmer valued not any episcopal consecration, which he had received 
in the Catholic church, yet he presumed not to make the denial thereof an article of the 
protestant faith : but queen Elizabeth's pretended bishops, and English church, in their 
convocation 1562, seeing", they knew they had no episcopal character by imposition of 
true bishop's hands, thought fit to make it a part of the protestant belief, " That no 
such visible sign or ceremony was necessary, or instituted by Christ and, therefore, 
concluded holy orders not to "be a sacrament. And though, I say, the church of Eng- 
land now teaches and practises the contrary, and in king James the First's reign erased 
from the text the word election as an imposture, or gross corruption, yet this change of 
the matter does no more make them now true priests and bishops, than their last change 
of the form of ordination, in the year 1662, soon after the happy restoration of king 
Charles the second. 

Ecclesia non est, quae sacerdotem non habet. 

There can be no church without priests. — St. Jerom. 

It is enough, that in this place we have proved these men without consecration or or- 
dination ; yet seeing they glory also in assuming to themselves the name of pastors, pas- 
tor of St. Martin's, &c. it may not be unseasonable to propose a few queries, touching* 
their pastoral jurisdiction. 

I. Whether it is not a power of the keys, to institute a pastor over a flock of clergy 
and people ? 

II. Whether any but a pastor can give pastoral jurisdiction ? 

III. Whether any bishop, but the bishop of the diocese, or commissioned from him, 
or his superior, can validly institute a pastor to any parochial church, within such a dio- 
cese ? 

IV. Whether any number of bishops can validly confirm, or give pastoral jurisdic- 
tion to the bishop, of any diocese, if the metropolitan, or some authorized by him, or his 
superior, be not one ? 

V. Or to the metropolitan of a province, if the primate of the nation, or some author* 
ized by him, or his superior, be not one ? 

VI. Whether any but the chief patriarch of that part of the world, or authorized by 
him, can validly give pastoral jurisdiction to the primate of a nation ? 

VII. Whether the bishop of Rome is not chief patriarch of the western church, con- 
sequently of this nation ? 

VIII. Whether Mat. Parker, the first protestant pretended archbishop of Canterbury, 
received his pastoral jurisdiction from the bishop of Rome, or from others by him author- 
ized ? or, 

IX. Whether those who made Mat. Parker primate of England, or archbishop of Can- 
terbury, had any jurisdiction to that act, but what they received from queen Elizabeth ? 

X. Whether queen Elizabeth had the power of the keys, either of order or jurisdic- 
tion ? 

XI. Whether it is not an essential part of the catholic church to have pastors ? 

XII. Whether salvation can be had in a church wanting pastors ? 

XIII. Whether they do not commit .a most heinous sacrilege, who having neither valid 
ordination, nor pastoral jurisdiction, do notwithstanding take upon them to administer 
sacraments, and exercise all other acts of episcopal and priestly functions ? 

XIV. Whether the people are not also involved with them, in the same sin, so often 
as they communicate with them in, or co-operate to, those sacrilegious presumptions ? 

XV. Whether those, who assume to themselves the names and offices of bishops and 
priests, take upon them to teach, preach, administer sacraments, and perform all other 
episcopal and priestly functions, without vocation, without ordination, without consecra- 
tion, without succession, without mission, or without pastoral jurisdiction, are not the 
very men of whom our blessed Saviour charged us to beware ?* 

XVI. To conclude, whether it is wisdom in the people of England, to hire such. men 
at the charge of perhaps above 1,000,000/. per annum, to lead them the broad way to 
perdition ? 



Mat. 7. 15. 



?8 



PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS 



ANOTHER CORRUPT ADDITION AGAINST THE PERPETUAL SACRIFICE OF 



CHRIST'S BODY AND BLOOD. 



Protestants teach, in the 31st of the 39 articles, " That the offering of Christ once 
made, is that perfect redemption, propitiation and satisfaction for all the sins of the whole 
world, &c. Wherefore the sacrifice of masses, in which it was commonly said, that the 
priests did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain and guilt, 
were blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits :" by this doctrine the church of Eng- 
land bereaves Christians of the most inestimable jewel and richest treasure, that ever 
Christ our Saviour left to his church ; to wit, the most holy and venerable sacrifice of his 
sacred body and blood in the which is daily offered to God the Father, for a pro- 

pitiation for our sins. And because they would have this false and erroneous doctrine 
of their's backed by sacred Scripture, they most egregiously corrupt the text, Heb. x. 
verse 10. by adding to the same two words not found in the Greek or Latin copies, viz. 
" For all the apostle's words being, — " In the which will we are sanctified by the ob- 
lation of the body of Jesus Christ once :" which they corruptly read, in their last trans- 
lation, — " By the which will we are sanctified, through the offering of the body of Jesus 
Christ once, for all." By which addition they endeavour to take away the daily oblation 
of the body and blood of Christ in the holy' sacrifice of the mass : contradicting the 
doctrine of God's holy church, which believes and teaches, " That our Lord God, al- 
though he was once to offer himself to God the Father upon the altar of the cross by 
death, that he might there work eternal redemption ; yet because his priesthood was not 
to be extinguished by death, in the last supper, which night lie was to be betrayed, that 
he might leave a visible sacrifice to his beloved spouse the church, whereby that bloody 
one, once to be performed upon the cross, should be represented, and the memory 
thereof should remain to the end of the world, and the wholesome virtue thereof should 
be applied for the remission of those sins which we daily commit, declaring himself to 
be ordained a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchizedek. He offered to 
God the Father his body and blood, under the forms of bread and wine ; and under the 
signs of the same things he gave it to the apostles, whom then he ordained priests of 
the New Testament, that they should receive it ; and by the words he commanded them, 
and their successors in priesthood, that they should offer it, " Do ye this in commemo- 
ration of me," &c. And, " Because in this divine sacrifice, which is performed in the 
mass, the self-same Christ is contained, and unbloodily offered, who offered himself once 
bloodily upon the altar of the cross : the holy synod teaches the sacrifice to be truly 
propitiatory, &c. Wherefore, according to the tradition of the apostles, it is duly offer- 
ed, not only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities of the faithful 
that are living, but also such as are dead in Christ, as not yet fully purged."* This is 
the catholic doctrine, delivered in the sacred council of Trent, which the church of 
England calls blasphemies, fables, and dangerous deceits ; and against which they falsify 
the sacred text of Scripture, by thrusting into it words of their own, which they find not 
in any of the Greek or Latin copies. 

But lest they may object, that this is but a new doctrine, not taught in the primitive 
church, nor delivered down to us by the apostles by apostolical tradition ; I will give 
you these following testimonies from the fathers of the first five hundred years. 

St. Cyprian says,f " Christ is priest for ever, according to the order of Melchizedek, 
which order is this, coming from this sacrifice, and thence descending, that Melchizedek 
was priest of God most high, that he offered bread and wine, that he blessed Abraham ; 
for who is more a priest of God most high, than our Lord Jesus Christ, who offered sa- 
crifice to God the Father, and offered the same that Melchizedek had offered, bread and 
wine, viz. his body and blood ?" 

And a little after: " That therefore in Genesis the blessing might be rightly celebrated 
about Abraham by Melchizedek the priest, the image, or figure of Christ's sacrifice, 
consisting in bread and wine, went before ; which thing our Lord perfecting and per- 
forming, offered bread, and the chalice mixed with wine, and he, that is the plenitude, 
fulfilled the verity of the prefigured image." 



* Concil. Trid. sess. 22. cap. 1. cap. Z t Ep. 53. ad Cseciluim. 



BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 



79 



The same holy father, in another place, as cited also by the Magdeburgian centurists,* 
in this manner, " Our Lord Jesus Christ," says Cyprian, lib. ii. ep. 3. " is the high-priest 
of God the Father ; and first offered sacrifice to God the Father, and commanded the 
same to be done in remembrance of him : and that priest truly executes Christ's place, 
who imitates that which Christ did; and then he offers in the church a true and full 
sacrifice to God." This saying so displeases the centurists, that they say, " Cyprian 
affirms superstitiously, that the priest executes Christ's place in the supper of our 
Lord." 

St. Hierom,f " Have recourse," says he, " to the book of Genesis, and you shall find 
Melchizedek, king of Salem, prince of this city, who even there, in figure of Christ, of- 
fered bread and wine, and dedicated the Christian mystery in our Saviour's body and 
blood." Again, " Melchizedek offered not bloody victims, but dedicated the sacrament 
of Christ in bread and wine, a simple and pure sacrifice." And yet more plainly in ano- 
ther place, " Our ministry," says he " is signified in the word of Order, not by Aaron, in 
immolating brute victims, but in offering bread and wine, that is, the body and blood of 
our Lord Jesus." 

St. Augustine expressly teaches, that " Melchizedek bringing forth the sacrament, or 
mystery, of our Lord's table, knew how to figure his eternal priesthood."* — " There 
first appeared," says he in another place, "that sacrifice which is now offered to God by 
Christians, in the whole world.§ 

Again, (Cone. 1. in psal. xxxv.) " There was formerly," says he, " as you have known, 
the sacrifice of the Jews, according to the order of Aaron, in the sacrifice of beasts, and 
this in mystery : for not as yet was the sacrifice of the body and blood of our Lord, which 
the faithful know, and such as have read the Gospel ; which sacrifice now is spread over 
the whole world. Set therefore before your eyes two sacrifices, that according to the 
order of Aaron ; and this, according to the order of Melchizedek : for it is written, our 
Lord has sworn, and it shall not repent him, thou art a priest for ever, according to the 
order of Melchizedek." And in Cone. 2. psal. xxxiii. he expressly teaches, " That 
Christ, of his body and blood, instituted a sacrifice, according to the order of Melchi- 
zedek." 

Nothing can be more plain than these words of St. Irenseus, in which he affirms of 
Christ, that|| " Giving counsel also to his disciples, to offer the first fruits of his creatures 
to God ; not as it were needing it, but that they might be neither unfruitful nor ungrate- 
ful, he himself took of the creature of bread, and gave thanks, saying, this is my body ; 
and likewise the chalice, he confessed to be his blood, which is made of that creature 
which is in use amongst us, and taught a new oblation of the New Testament, which 
oblation the church receiving from the apostles, throughout the whole world, offers 
to God, to him who gives us nourishment, the first fruits of his gifts in the New Testa- 
ment ; of whom, amongst the twelve prophets, Malachy has thus foretold ; I have no will 
in you, the Jews, says our omnipotent Lord, and I will take no sacrifices at your hands, 
because, from the rising of the sun to the setting thereof, my name is glorified among 
the Gentiles; and in every place, incense is offered to my name, and a pure sacrifice^ 
because my name is great among the Gentiles, saith our Lord Almighty, manifestly sig- 
nifying by these things, because the former people indeed ceased to offer to God; but 
in every place a sacrifice is offered to God, and this pure, for his name is glorified among 
the Gentiles." Thus St. Irenxus, whose words so touch the protestant centurists, that 
they say, " Irenjeus, &c. seems to speak very incommodiously, when he says, he, Christ, 
taught the new oblation of the New Testament, which the cimrch receiving from the 
apostles, offered to God over all the world." 

Eusebius Csesariensis.t " We sacrifice, therefore, to our highest Lord a sacrifice of 
praise : we sacrifice to God a full, odoriferous, and most holy sacrifice : we sacrifice after 
u new manner, according to the New Testament, a pure host." 

St. Jo. Chrysostome expounding the words of the prophet Malachy, says,** " The 
church, which every where carries about Christ in it, is prohibited from no place; but 
in every place there are altars, in every place doctrines; these things God foretold by 
bis prophet, for both declaring the church's sincerity, and the ingratitude of the other 
people, the Jews, he tells them, I have no pleasure in you, &c! Mark, how clearly and 



* In the Alphab. Table of the 3 Cent, under the letter S. col. 83. 

f Ep. ad Marcel, ut Migret. liethleem. Ep. ad Evagr. Qusest. in Gen, c. 14. 

* Ep. 95. 

§ Lib. 16. de Ci. Dei, c. 22. See him also lib. 17. c. 17. and lib. 18. c. 35. cum Psalm 
J09. lib. 1. contr. Advers. Leg. & Prophet, c. 20. Serm. 4. de Sanctis Innocenlibus, 
f| Lib. 4. Advers. Hser. c. 32. 

f Lib. 1. demonstrat. Evang, c, 10. ** Ad. Psal 95, 



80 



PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS 



plainly he interprets the mystical table, which is the unbloody host, and the pure per- 
fume he calls holy prayers, which are offered after the host. Thou seest how it is 
granted, that that angelical sacrifice should every where be known ; thou seest it is 
circumscribed with no limits, neither the altars, nor the song 1 . In every place incense 
is offered to my name ; therefore the mystical table, the heavenly and exceedingly vene- 
rable sacrifice is indeed the prime pure host." 

Is it not a thing to be admired, that the church of England should not only corrupt the 
sacred Scriptures against the great and most dreadful sacrifice ; but should also make it 
an article of her faith, that it is a blasphemous fable, and dangerous deceit? When, 
without all doubt, she cannot be ignorant, that the holy fathers call it * " A visible sacri- 
fice. " f " The true sacrifice." * " The daily sacrifice." § " The sacrifice according to 
the order of Melchizedek." || " The sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ." " The 
sacrifice of the altar." ** " The sacrifice of the church." ff " The sacrifice of the New 
Testament." " Which succeeded to all sacrifices of the Old Testament." And that 
it was offered for the health of the emperor, Sacrijicamus pro salute imperatoris, says 
Tertullian, de Scapul. c. 2. That it was offered for the sick, Pro infirrnis etiam sacrifi- 
camus, says St. Chrysostome, Horn. 27. in Act Apos. " For those upon the sea, and for 
the fruits of the earth," idem. And for the purging of houses infected with wicked 
spirits. St. Aug. de Civit. Dei, lib. 22. c. 8, says, that " One went and offered," in the 
house infected, " the sacrifice of Christ's body, praying that the vexation might cease; 
and by God's mercy it ceased immediately." 

In the first council of Nice, can. 14. we find these words, " The holy council has been 
informed, that in some places and cities the deacons distribute the sacrament to priests : 
neither rule nor custom has delivered, that they who have not power to offer sacrifice, 
should distribute the body of Christ to them who offer." — See also, concil. 3. Braca^ 
rense, can. 3. and concil. 12. can. 5. Moreover that " this holy sacrifice," as God's 
church at this day teaches and practises, " w as offered for the sins of the living and 
dead," is a truth so undeniable, that Crastoius, a learned protestant, in his book of the 
Mass, against Bellarmin, page 167, reprehends Origen, St. Athanasius, St. Ambrose, St. 
Chrysostome, St. Augustine, St. Gregory the Great, and venerable Bede, for maintain- 
ing " The mass to be a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the living and of the dead." 
Consider then, what truth there is in the words of that author §§ who affirms, that in 
Gregory the Great's time, " masses for the dead were not intended to deliver souls from 
those torments of purgatory." Doubtless he considered not the words of St. Augustine, 
lib. 9. Confess, c. 12. and de Verb. Apost. Serm. 34. viz. " That the sacrifice of 
our price was offered for his mother Monica, being dead," and, " That the universal 
church does observe, as delivered from their forefathers, to pray for the faithful deceased 
in the sacrifice, and also to offer the sacrifice for them." Nor considered this great 
vindicator, that great miracle related by St. Gregory the Great himself, concerning Pur- 
gatory, and the benefits souls there receive, by the offering up of this propitiatory sacri- 
fice. In his fourth Book of Dialogues, cap. 55. telling us of a monk called Justus, who 
was obsequious to him, and watched with him in his daily sickness : " This man," says 
he, " being dead, I appointed the healthful host to be offered for his absolution thirty 
days together; which done, the said Justus appeared to his brother- by vision, and said, 
I have been hitherto evil, but now am well, &c." And the brethren in the monastery 
counting the days, found that to be the day on which the 30th oblation was offered for 
him. 

Nor would doubtless this vindicator have told us, " That transubstantiation was yet 
unborn," to wit, in Gregory the Great's time, unless he had a mind to impose upon his 
reader, if he had ever read "the doctrine of those fathers, who lived before St. Gregory's 
time, for example: 



* St. Aug. de Civit. Dei, lib. 10. c. 19. 

f St. Cypr. 1. 2. ep. 3. & St. Aug. cit. c. 20. 

i Aug. cit. c. 16. & cone, tolet. 1 can. 5. Origen. in Num. Horn. 23. 
§ S. Cvprian, 1. 2. ep. 3. &. Aug. lib. 16. c. 22. de Civit. Dei. 

j| Et lib. 22. c. 8. et li. 20. contr. Faustum c. 18. et S. Hierom li. 3. contr. Pelag. Aug 
in Psal. 33. con. 2. to 8. et. S. Chrys. lib. 1 Cor. Horn. 24. 

1 St. Aug. in Enchiridion c. 110. et de Cura pro mortuis, c. 18. 
** Et de Civit. Dei. 1. 10. c. 20. 

ff Et de gratia Novi Test. c. 18. et S. Irenzeus,li. 4. c. 32. 

}t Aug de Civit. Dei, li. 17. c. 20. St. Clement, in Apost. Constit. edit. 1564 Antverptse, 
li. 6. c. 22. fol. 123. 

§§ The author of the Second Defence of tbeTSxposition of the Doctrine of the Church 
of England, &c, p, 13. 



BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 8 1 

St. Ignatius Martyr, in his epistle to the people of Smyrna, speaking- of the heretics 
bf his time, men of the same judgment with this vindicator, writes thus : " They allow 
not of eucharists and oblations," says he, " because they do not believe the eucharist to 
be th.2 flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Fa- 
ther, in his mercy, raised again from the dead." 

St. Justin Martyr, in his apology to the emperor Antonius Pius, made for the Chris- 
tians: " Now this food," says he, " amongst us, is called the eucharist, which it is lawful 
for none to partake of, but those who believe our doctrine to be true, who have been 
washed in the laver of regeneration for the remission of sins ; and who regulate their 
lives according to the prescription of Christ : for we do not receive this as common 
bread, or common drink ; but as by the word of God, Jesus Christ, our Redeemer, being 
made flesh, had both flesh and blood for the sake of our salvation ; just so we are 
taught, that that food, over which thanks are given by prayers, in his own words, and 
whereby our blood and flesh are by a change nourished, is the flesh and blood of the 
incarnate Jesus ; For the apostles, in the commentaries written by them, called the 
Gospels, have recorded that Jesus so commanded them." 

St. Irenaeus, taking an argument from the participation of the eucharist, proves the 
resurrection of the flesh against the heretics of his time.* " As the blessed apostles 
say. Because we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones ; not speaking 
this of any spiritual or invisible man, but of that disposition which belongs to a real man, 
tha: consists of flesh, nerves, and bones ; and is nourished by the chalice, which is his 
(Christ's) blood, and receives increase by that bread which is his body: And as the vine, 
being planted in the earth, brings forth fruit in season : And a grain of wheat falling upon 
the ground, and rotting, rises up with increase by the virtue of God, who comprehends 
all things, which afterwards, by a prudent management, becomes serviceable to men ; 
ani receiving the word of God, are made the eucharist, which is the body and blood of 
Cirist; so also our bodies being nourished by it, and laid in the earth, and there dis- 
solved, will arise at their time ; the word of God working in them this resurrection, to 
the glory of God the Father." 

Eusebius Cxsariensis.f — " Making a daily commemoration of him, (Christ,) and daily 
celebrating the memory of his body and blood; and being now preferred to a more ex- 
cellent sacrifice and office than that of the Old Law, we think it unreasonable any more 
to fall back to those first and weak elements which contained certain signs and figures, 
but not the truth itself." Another place of Eusebius, a s quoted by St. John of Damas- 
cene, " Many sinners," says he, " being priests, do offer sacrifice . neither does God deny 
his assistance, but by the Holy Ghost consecrates the proposed gift* . A.nd the bread in- 
deed is made the precious body of our Lord, and the cup his precious blood."* 

St. Hilary. — " We must not speak," says he, " of the things of God, like men, or in 
the sense of the world : Let us read what is written, and understand what we read, and 
then we shall believe with a perfect faith. For what we say of the natural existence of 
Christ, within us, if we do not learn from him, we say foolishly and profanely ; for he 
himself says, " My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed." There is no 
place left for doubting of the reality of his flesh and blood ; for now, by the profession 
of Christ himself, and by our faith, it is truly flesh, and truly blood: is not this truth ? 
It may indeed not be true for them, who deny Christ to be true God."§ 

St. Cyril of Jerusalem. || — " Since therefore Christ himself does thus affirm, and says 
of the bread, " This is my body ;" who, from henceforward, dare be so bold as to doubt 
of it? And since the same (Christ) does assure us and say, " This is my blood," who, 
I say, can doubt of it, and say, it is not his blood ? In Cana of Galilee he once, with his 
sole will, turned water into wine, which much resembles blood ; and does not he deserve 
to be credited, that he changed wine into his blood ? For if, when invited to a corporal 
marriage, he wrought so stupendous a miracle, have we not much more reason to con- 
fess, that'he gave his body and blood to the children of the bridegroom ? Wherefore,^ 
full of certainty, let us receive the body and blood of Christ: for under the form of 
bread is jfiven to thee the body, and the blood under the form of wine ; that having re- 
ceived the body and blood of Christ, thou mayest be made partaker with him of his 
bodv and blood. Thus we shall become Christophers, that is, " bearers of Christ," re- 
ceiving his body and blood into us.— Do not therefore look on it as mere bread only, or 
bare wine ; for, as God himself has said, it is the body and blood of Christ. Notwith- 
standing, therefore, the information of sense, let faith confirm thee ; and do not judge ot 
the thing by the taste, but rather take it for most certain by faith, without the least doubt 
that his body and blood are given thee.— When you come to communion, do not come 

* Lib. 5. c. 11. * Lib. 5 - Parallel, c. 45. || In Catechis, 

f Lib' 1." demonstrat. Evairg. c. 10. § Lib. 8. de Trinitate. 

11 



PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS, 



holding both the palms of your hands open, nor your fingers spread ; but let your left 
hand be as it were a rest under the right, into which you are to receive so great a King : 
and in the hollow of your hand take the body of Christ, saying, Amen."* 

St. Gregory Nyssen.f — " When we have eaten any thing that is prejudicial to our 
constitution, it is necessary that we take something that is capable of repairing what was 
impaired ; that so, when this healing antidote is within us, it may work out of the body, 
by a contrary affection, all the force of the poison. And what is this antidote ? It is 
nothing but that body which overcame death, and was the origin of our life. For, as 
the apostle tells us, as a little leaven makes the whole lump like itself, so that body, 
which by God's appointment suffered death, being received within our body, changes 
and reduces the whole to its own likeness. And as when poison is mixed up with any 
thing that is medicinal, the whole compound is rendered useless ; so likewise that im- 
mortal body being within him that receives it, converts the whole into its own nature. 
But there being no other way of receiving any thing witin our body, unless it be first 
couveyed into our stomach by eating or drinking, it is necessary that by this ordinary 
way of nature, the life-giving virtue of the Spirit be communicated to us. But now, sjnce 
that body alone, which was united to the Divinity, has received this grace, and it is mani- 
fest that our body can no otherwise become immortal, we are to consider how it is im 
possible, that one body, which is always distributed to so many thousand Christians oyer 
the whole world, should be the whole, by a part in every one, and still remain whol$ in 
itself." 

And a little after. u I do therefore now rightly believe, that the bread sanctified by 
the word of God, is changed into the body of God, the Word. — And here likewise ^he 
bread, as the apostle says, is sanctified by the word of God and prayer ; not so, that^y 
being eaten it becomes the body of the Word, but because it is suddenly changed by tjie 
Word into his body, by these words, " This is my body." — And this is effected by virtue 
of the benediction, by which the nature of those things which appear is trans-element^d 
into it." 

Again, in another place. * — " And the bread in the beginning is only common breac^ 
but when it is sanctified by the mystery, it is made and called the body of Christ." 

St. Hierom. — " God forbid," says he, " that I should speak detractingly of these men, 
(priests,) who by succeeding the apostles in their function, do make the body of Christ 
with their sacred mouth."§ 

St. Augustine.!| — " We have heard," says he, " our master, who always speaks truth, 
our divine Redeemer, the gl»*wrtir of men, recommending to us our ransom, his blood : 
for he spake of his b^y ana * blood ; which body he called meat, and which blood he 
caneu a»:„i.. me faithful understand the sacrament of the faithful.— But there are 
some (says he) who do not believe they said, " This is a hard saying, who can hear 
him ?" It is an hard saying but to those who are obstinate ; that is, it is incredible but t& 
the incredulous."|| 

The same holy father and great doctor, in his commentary upon the XXXIII Psalm, 
speaks thus of Christ : " And he was carried in his own hands ? And can this, brethren, 
be possible in man ? Was ever any man carried in his own hands ? He may be carried 
by the hands of others, but in his own no man was ever yet carried. How this can be 
literally understood of David, we cannot discover; but in Christ we find it verified: for 
Christ was carried in his own hands, when giving his own very body, he said, " this is 
my body ;" for that body he carried in his own hands." Such is the humility of our Lord 
Jesus Christ, which is much recommended to men.— How plain and positive are the 
words of these ancient and holy fathers, for the real presence of Christ's body and blood 
in the blessed sacrament of the eucharist, which protestants so flatly deny ? I would 
ask our church of England divines, whether, if they had been present among the apos- 
tles when Christ said, " Take and eat, this is my body," they durst have assumed the 
boldness to have contradicted the omnipotent Word, and have replied, " It is not thy 
body, Lord, it is only bread ?" I believe the most stiff sacramentarian in England, would 
have trembled to have made such a reply; though now they dare, with blasphemous 
mouth, call the doctrine of transubstantiation the " mystery of iniquity." 

I have insisted somewhat the longer upon these two points, than perhaps the reader 
may think proper for this treatise : but when he considers that the priesthood and sacri- 
fice, against which protestants have corrupted the Scripture, and framed their new ar- 
ticles of faith, are two such essential parts of Christian religion, that if either of them be 
taken away, the whole fabric of God's church falls to the ground, he will not look upon 
it as an unnecessary digression. 



It was the custom in those days for the priest to deliver the holy sacrament into the 
hand of the communicant. f In Orat. Cat. c. 37. * In Orat, in diem luroinum, 
§ In Epist. ad Heliodorum. || Lib. de Verb. Apost. Serm. 



OF THE SCRIPTURE, 



33 



SEVERAL OTHER CORRUPTIONS AND FALSIFICATIONS, NOT MENTIONED UNDER THE FOBEGOINO 

HEADS. 

This treatise increasing- beyond what indeed I designed it at first, will oblige me to 
as much brevity as possible, in these following 1 corruptions : 

In Romans 8 ver. 39. instead of the word " Charity," they, contrary to the Greek, 
translate " Love ;" and so generally in all places, where much is spoken in commenda- 
tion of charity. The reason is, because they attribute saltation to faith alone, they care 
not how little charity may sound in the ears of the people. — So likewise in the 1 Cor. 
cap. 13. for " Charity,'* they eight times say " Love." In Rom. 9. ver. 16. for this text, 
" Therefore it is not of the wilier, nor the runner, but of God that showeth mercy," they 
translate in their old Bibles, " So lieth it not then in a man's will or running, but in the 
mercy of God ;" changing Of, into In, and Wilier and Runner, into Will and Running ; 
and so make the apostle say, that it is not at all in man's will to consent or co-operate with 
God's grace and mercy. 

In 1 Corinthians, cap. 1. ver. 10. for " Schisms," which are spiritual divisions from the 
unity of the church, they translate " Dissentions," which may be in worldly things, as 
well as religion : this is done because themselves were afraid to be accounted schisma- 
tics. So likewise 

In Galatians 5. ver. 20. for " Heresy," as it is in the Greek, they translate "Sects," 
in favour of themselves, being charged with heresy : also 

In Titus 3. ver. 10. instead of saying, according to the Greek, " A man that is a here- 
tic," &c. their Bible of 1662 translates, " A man that is author of Sects ;" favouring that 
name for their own sakes, and dissembling it as though the Holy Scripture spake not 
against heresy or heretics, schism or schismatics. 

In 1 Timothy, cap. 3. ver. 6. for a " Neophyte," (one lately baptized or planted in 
Christ's mystical body) they translate in their first Bibles, " A young scholar ;" as 
though an old scholar could not be a Neophite, by deferring his baptism, or by long de- 
laying his conversion to God, which he learned to be necessary long before* 

In Titus 3 ver. 8. instead of these words, " To excel in good works," they translate, 
*« To show forth good works;" and as their last edition has it, " To maintain good works j" 
against the different degrees of good works. 

In Hebrews 10. ver. 20. for "Dedicated," they translate, in their first Bibles, "Pre- 
pared," in favour of their heresy, that Christ was not the first who went into Heaven, 
which the word dedicated signifies. 

In the two Epistles of Peter, cap. 3. ver. 16. they force the text to maintain a frivolous 
evasion, that " St. Paul's Epistles are not hard," but the " things in the Epistles :" where- 
as both the Greek and Latin texts are indifferent with regard to both constructions : it is 
a general custom of theirs, that where they find the Greek text indifferent to two senses, 
there they restrain it only to that which may be most advantageous to their own error, 
thereby excluding its reference to the other sense. And oftentimes, where one sense is 
received, read, and expounded by the greater part of the ancient fathers, and by all the 
Latin church, there they very partially follow the other sense, not so generally received. 

In St. James 1. ver. 13. for " God is not a tempter of evils," they translate, " Gcd is 
not tempted with evils," and " God cannot be tempted with evils,"* than which nothing 
is more impertinent to the apostle's speech in that place. Why is it that they refuse to 
say, " God is not tempted to evil," as well as the other ? Is it on account of the Greek 
word, which is a passive ? They may find in their Lexicon, that it is both an active and 
passive : as also appears by the very circumstance of the foregoing words, " Let no man 
say, that he is tempted by God." Why so ? " Because," say the protestant translators, 
€S God is not tempted with evil." Is this a good reason ? Nothing less. How then ? 
" Because God is not tempted to evil :" therefore let no man say, that " He is tempted 
by God." 

This reason is so coherent, and so necessary in this place, that if the Greek word were 
only a passive, as it is not, yet it might have better beseemed Beza to translate it active- 
ly, than it did to turn an active into a passive, against the real presence, as himse 1 : con- 
fesses he did without scruple. But though he might and ought to have translated this 
word actively, yet he would not, because he would favour his own heresy •, which, quite 
contrary to these words of the apostle, says, that " God is a tempter to evil :" his words 



* amtgAws xttmv. 



84 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 



are, inducit Dominus in tentationem eos quos Sata?i<e arbitrio permittet, &c* " The Lord 
leads into temptation those whom he permits to be at Satan's disposal ; or into whom ra- 
ther he leads or brings in Satan himself, to fill their hearts, as Peter speaketh." Note, 
that he says, God brings Satan into a man to fill his heart, as Peter said to Ananias, " Why- 
has Satan filled thy heart, to lie unto the Holy Ghost ?" So that by this doctrine of Beza, 
God brought Satan into Ananias's heart to make him lie unto the Holy Ghost ; and so 
leading him into temptation, was author and cause of that heinous sin. 

Is not this to say, " God is a tempter to evil," quite contrary to St. James's words ? 
Or could he that is of this opinion, translate the contrary ; to wit, that " God is no tempt- 
er to evil ?" Is not this as much as to say, that God also brought Satan into Judas to fill 
his heart, and so was author of Judas's treason, even as he was of Paul's conversion ? Is 
not this a most absurd and blasphemous opinion ; yet how can they free themselves from 
it, who allow and maintain the aforesaid exposition of " God's leading into temptation ?" 
Kay, Beza, for maintaining the same, translates, " God's Providence," instead of " God's 
Prescience," Acts 2. ver. 23. a version so false, that the English Bezites, in their trans- 
lation, are ashamed to follow him. 

And which is worse than all this, if worse can be, they make God not only a leader of 
men into temptation, but even the author and worker of sin : yea, that God created or 
appointed men to sin : as appears too plainly, not only in their translation of this follow- 
ing text of St. Peter's, but also from Beza's commentary on the same. Also Bucer, one 
of king Edward the -Vlth's apostles, held directly, that " God is the author of sin."f 

St. Peter says of the Jews, that Christ is to them, petra scandali qui offendunt verba 
nee credunt in quo & posili sunt, uc o kui triQarttv ; that is, " A rock of scandal to them 
(the Jews) that stumble at the word, neither do believe wherein also they are put," as 
the Rhemish Testament translates it : or as it is rendered in king Edward the Vlth's 
English translation, and in the first of queen Elizabeth's, " They believe not that where- 
on they were set:" which translation lllyricus approves, sayings "This is well to be 
marked, lest a man imagine that God himself did put them, and (as one, meaning Beza, 
against the nature of the Greek word, translates and interprets it) that God created 
them for this purpose, that they should withstand him. Erasmus and Calvin, referring 
this word to that which goes before, interpret it not amiss, that the Jews were made or 
ordained to believe the word of God, and their Messias; but yet that they would not 
believe him : for to them belonged the promises, the Testaments, and the Messias him- 
self ; as St. Peter says, Acts 2, and 3. and St. Paul, Rom. 9. And to them were com- 
mitted the oracles of God, by witness of the same Paul," Rom. 3. Thus lllyricus ; who 
has here given the true sense of this text, according to the signification of the Greek 
word ; and has proved the same by Scripture, by St. Peter and St. Paul, and has confirmed 
it by Erasmus and Calvin. Yea, Luther follows the same sense in this place : so does 
Castalio in his Annotations to the New Testament. 

Yet Beza, against all these, to defend his blasphemous doctrine, that " God leads men 
into temptation, and brings in Satan to fill their hearts," translates it thus : Sunt immo- 
rigeri ad quod etiam conditi fuerunt>% — " They are rebellious, whereunto also they were 
created :" with whom his scholars, our English translators, are resolved to agree : there- 
fore, in their Bible of the year 1577, they read, " Being disobedient unto the which 
thing they were ordained." And in that of 1572 ; " Being disobedient unto the which 
thing they were even ordained :" this is yet worse, and with this, word for word, agrees 
the Testament of 1580, and the Scottish Bible of 1579. This is also the Geneva transla- 
tion in the Bible of 1561, which the French Geneva Bible follows. And how much our 
protestant last translation differs from these, may be seen in the Bible printed at Lon- 
don, anno 1683, where it is read thus : " And a rock of offence, even to them which 
stumble at the word, being disobedient, whereunto also they are appointed." 

Is not this to say positively, that God is author of men's disobedience or rebellion 
against Christ ? " But if God," says Castalio against Beza, " hath created some men to 
rebellion or disobedience, he is author of their disobedience ; as if he has created some 
to obedience, he is truly author of their obedience." Yes, this is to make God the au- 
thor of men's sin, for which purpose it was so translated : and thus Beza in his notes 
upon the text explains it : that " Men are made or fashioned, framed, stirred up, created 
or ordained, not by themselves, for that were absurd, but by God, to be scandalized at 
him, and his Son our Saviour ; Christus est eis offendiculo, prout etiam ad hoc ipsum a Deo 
sunt conditi ." and further discourses at large, and brings other texts to prove this sense, 
and this translation. 



* Annot, Nov. Test. Anno. 1556. Mat. 6. v. 13. 

f See Bucer's Scripta Anglicana, p. 931. Et in Epist. ad Rom. in p. 1. c. 94. 

% lllyricus's Gloss, in 1 Pet. c. 2. ver. 8. 

•5 Vid Castalio in defensione quatranslat. p. 153, 154, 155„ 



OF THE SCRIPTURE. 



85 



And though Luther and Calvin, as is said, dissented not from the true sense of this 
text, yet touching 1 the blasphemous docti'ine,* that " God is the author of sin," they, 
with Zuinglius, must, for all this, have the right hand of Beza. " How can man prepare 
himself to good," says Luther, " seeing it is not in his power to make his ways evil ? 
For God works the wicked work in the wicked." 

" When we commit adultery or murder," says Zuinglius, " it is the work of God, be= 
ing the mover, the author, and inciter, &c. God moves the thief to kill, &c. He is 
forced to sin, &c. God hardened Pharaoh, not speaking hyperbolically, but he truly 
hardens him, yea, although he resist." — By which, and other of his writings, he so plainly 
teaches God to be the author of sin, that he is therefore particularly reprehended by 
the learned protestant Grawerus, in Absurda Absurdorum, c. 5. de Pruedest. fol. 3, 4. 

v God is author," says Calvin, " of all those things, which these popish judges would 
hare to happen only by his idle sufferance. "f He also affirms our sins to be not only by 
God's permission, but by " His decree and will :" which blasphemy is so evidently 
taught by him and his followers, that they are expressly condemned for it by their fa- 
mous brethren ; Feming, lib. de univers. Grat. p. 109. Osiander, Enchirid. Controv. p„ 
104. Scaffman, de peccat. causis. p. 155, 27. Stizlinus disput. Theol. de Provide Dei? 
Sect. 141. Graver, in Absurda Absurd, in frontisp. Yea, the protestant magistrates of 
Berne made it penal by the laws, for any in their territories to preach Calvin's doctrine 
thereof, or for the people to read any of his books concerning the same.t Are not these 
blessed reformers ? O excellent instrument of God ! as Dr. Tenison stiles the chief of 
them.§ 

Protestants denying free will in man, not only to do good, but even to resist evil, open 
a very wide passage into this impious doctrine, of making God the author of sim 

In the 1 St. Peter, cap. 1. ver. 22. the apostle exhorts Christians to live as becomes 
men of so excellent a vocation : " Purifying," says he, *' your souls by obedience of 
charity,"!! &c. a little before, ver. 17. remembering always, that " God, without excep- 
tion of persons, judges every man according to his works." From which places it ap- 
pears, that we have free will working with the grace of God ; that we purify and cleanse 
our souls from sin ; that good works are necessarily required of Christians : for by many 
divine arguments St. Peter urges this conclusion : Ut animas nostras castificemus y " That 
we purify our own souls." So the protestant translation, made in Edward the Vlth's 
time, has it, " Forasmuch as you have purified your souls."TI So likewise one of queen 
Elizabeth's Bibles, " Even ye which have purified your souls ;" and so it is in the Greek, 
Notwithstanding all which Beza, in his Testaments of 1556 and 1565, translates it, Anu 
mabus vestris purijicatis obediendo veritati per Spiritum : which another of queen Eliza- 
beth's bibles renders thus : " Seeing your souls are purified in obeying the truth, through 
the Spirit." So translates also the English Bible, printed at Geneva, 1561, and the 
Scotch, printed at Edinburgh, 1579. 

So that these words make nothing at all either for free will, or co-operation with God's 
grace, or valufe of good works, but rather the contrary ; proving that in our justification 
we work not, but are wrought : we purify not ourselves, but are purified ; we are not 
active and doqrs with God's grace, but passive and sufferers : which opinion the council 
of Trent condemns.** The protestant Bible of 1683 has again corrected this, and trans- 
lates, " Seeingye have purified your souls," &c. but whether with any good and sincere 
intention, apptars by their having left uncorrected another fault of the same stamp in 
Phihppians, cap. 1. ver. 28. 

Where St. Pail, handling the same argument, exhorts the Christians not to fear the 
enemies of Christ, though they persecute never so terribly, " Which to them," says he, 
" is cause of perdition, but to you of salvation :" where he makes good works neces- 
sary, and so the causes of salvation, as sins are of damnation. But Beza will have the 
old interpreter overseen in so translating, " Because," says he, " the affliction of the 
faithful is never called the cause of their salvation, but the testimony ."ff And, there- 
fore, translates the Greek word Indicium. And his scholars, the English trans- 
lators, render it a " token," though, indeed, one of their Testaments translates it as we 



* Lut. To. 2. Wittem. an. 1551. Assert. Art. 36. Vid. de Servo. Arbit. fol. 195. Edit, 
1603. Zuing. To. 10. de providentia Dei, fol. 365, 366, 367. 
f Calvin, instit. 1. 1. c. 18. & 1. 2. c. 4. & 1. 3. c. 23. 
% Vid. Litteras Senat. Bern, ad Ministros. &c. an. 1555. 
§ Dr. Ten. Conf. with M. P. 

|| Castificantes animas vestras in obedientia Cbaritatis. 

\ Bib. 1561, 1579. 

** Sess. 6. cap. 4. 

ft Beza Annot. in ilium locum, 



86 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 



do, a " cause so does also Erasmus, and the Tigurine translators :* yea, the apostles 
comparing sins with good works, these leading to Heaven, as those to Hell, convinces its 
sense to be so ; as Theodoret, a Greek father, also gathers from that word, saying, 
"That procures to them destruction, but to you salvation .''f So St. Augustine, St. 
Hierom, and other Latin fathers. 

And that good works are a cause of salvation, our Saviour himself clearly shows, when 
he thus speaks of Mary Magdalen : Remittuntur ei peccata multa, qxioniam dilexit mul- 
tum ; " Many sins are forgiven her, because she loved much." Against which no man 
living can cavil from the Greek, Hebrew, or Latin, but that works of charity are a cause 
why sins are forgiven ; and so a cause of our justification and salvation, which are evi. 
dently the words and meaning of our blessed Saviour. Notwithstanding, Beza and our 
English translators have a shift for this also ; he translates, liemissa sunt peccata ejus 
multa; nam dilexit multum ; which in our English Bible is rendered, "Her sins which 
are many, are forgiven ; for she loved much which the reader perhaps may think to 
be a difference so small, as is not worth taking notice of ; but, if well considered, will 
be found as great, as is between our doctrine and protestants. And first, the text is cor- 
rupts I by making a fuller point than either the Greek or Latin bears, the English making 
some a colon, (:) and some a semicolon, (;) where in Greek there is only a comma, (,) 
and Beza, in his Latin, yet more desperately makes a down and full period, (.) thereby 
dividing and distracting the latter part from the former, as though it contained not a rea- 
son of that which went before, as it does, but were some new matter : wherein he is 
controlled by another of his own translators, and by the Greek prints of Geneva, Zurich, 
Basil, and other German cities, who point it a6 it is in our Latin and English. — but their 
falsehood appears much more in turning quoniam into nam, because into for.§ 

Seeing our Saviour's words are in effect thus, " Because she loved much, therefore 
many sins are forgiven her;" which they, by this perversion and mispointing it, make 
a quite different, and almost contrary sense ; thus, " Because she had many sins forgiven 
her, therefore she loveth much and this love following was a token of the remission 
which she, by only faith, had obtained before ; so turning the cause into the effect, and 
the antecedent into the consequent, hereby utterly overthrowing the doctrine which 
Christ by his words and reason gives, and the church of his words and reason gathers. 
Beza blushes not to confess why he thus altered Christ's words, saying, Nam dilexit, 
nyaTmcre, " For she loved:" the Vulgate translation and Erasmus rende? it, "Because 
she loved but I, says he, had rather interpret it as I do, that men may best understand 
in these words to be shown, not the cause of remission of sins, but rather that which 
ensued after such remission, and that by the consequent is gathered the antecedent. 
And, therefore, they who abuse this place, to overthrow free justification by faith alone, 
are very impudent and childish :"|| thus Beza. But the ancient fathers, whc were neither 
impudent nor childish, gathered from this text, that charity, as well as faith, is requisite 
for obtaining remission of sins. St. Chrysostom, Horn. 6. in Mat. says, 1 " As first by 
water and the spirit, so afterwards by tears and confession, we are made clean ;" which 
he proves by this place. So St. Gregory, expounding this same place, says, f Many sins 
are forgiven her, because she loved much ; as if it had been said expressl;, he burns out 
perfectly the rust of sin, whosoever burns vehemently with the fire of lovi. For so much 
more is the rust of sin scoured away, by how much more the heart of a siiner is inflamed 
with the great fire of charity." 

And St. Ambrose upon the same words. — " Good are the tears which ire able to wash 
away our sins. Good are the tears, wherein is not only the redemption of sinners, but 
also the refreshing of the just." 

And the great St. Augustine, debating this story in along homily, safs, ** " This sin- 
fill woman, the more she owed, the more she loved ; the forgiver of her debts, our Lord 
himself, affirming so : many sins are forgiven her, because she loved much. And why 
loved she much, but because she owed much ? Why did she all these offices of weeping, 
washing, &c. but to obtain remission of her sins ?" Other holy fathers agree in the self- 
same verity, all making her love to be a cause going before, and not an effect or sequel 
coming after the remission of sins. 

I have only taken notice here, how Beza and our English translators have corrupted 
this text ; but he who pleases to read Musculus, in locis Communibus, c. de Justificat. 11. 
5. will find him perverting it after another strange manner, by boldly asserting, without 
all reason or probable conjecture, that our blessed Saviour spoke in Hebrew, and used 



* Bib. 1561. fl Beza in Luc. 7. v. 47. 
f Theod. in Phil. cap. 1. f Horn. 33. in Evang. 

* Beza Test, anno 1565. Bib. 1683= •* Horn. 23. inter. 50. 
§ 1556, 



6V TllE SCRIPTURE. 



11 



the preterperfect for the present tense ; and that St. Luke wrote in the Doric dialect ; 
so that Musculus would have it said, " She loved Christ much, and no wonder ; she had 
good cause so to do, because many sins were forgiven her." 

But Zuinglius goes yet another way to work with this text, and tells us, that he sup- 
poses the word " Love" should have been " Faith :" his words are, " Because she loved 
muck. I suppose, that Love is here put for Faith ; because she has so great affiance in 
me, so many sins are forgiven her." For he says afterwards, " Thy Faith hath saved 
thee ; that is, has absolved and delivered thee from thy sins."* — Which one distinction 
of his, will answer all the places that in this controversy can be brought out of Scripture 
to refute their " Only Faith." But, to conclude, what can be more impious than to affirm, 
that for obtaining of sins, charity is not required as well as faith, seeing our blessed Sa- 
viour, if we credit his Evangelist, St. Luke, and I think his authority ought to be prefer- 
red before that of Zuinglius, Beza, Musculus, or our English sectaries, most divinely 
conjoins charity with faith, saying of charity, " Many sins are forgiven her, because she 
loved much !" straightway adding of faith, " Thy Faith has made thee safe ; go in 
peace." 

As you see here, they use all their endeavours to suppress the necessity of good and 
charitable works ; so, on the other side, they endeavoured to make their first Bibles 
countenance vice,j- so far as to seem to allow of the detestable sin of usury, provided it 
were not hurtful to the borrower. In Deuteronomy xxiii. ver. 19. they translate thus, 
" Thou shalt not hurt thy brother by usury of money, nor by usury of corn, nor by usury 
of any thing that he may be hurt withal :" by which they would have it meant, that usury 
is not here forbidden, unless it hurts the party that borrows. A conceit so rooted in 
most men's hearts, that they think such usury very lawful, and therefore frequently 
offend therein. But Almighty God, in this place of Holy Scripture, has not one word 
of hurting, or not hurting, as may be seen in the Hebrew and Greek ; and as also ap- 
pears from their having corrected the same in their Bible of 1683, where they read, as 
it ought to be, " Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother, usury of money, usury 
of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury." — If the Hebrew word signify to 
hurt by usury, why did not they, in the very words next following, in the self-same Bi- 
bles, translate it thus ** Unto a stran'ger thou mayest lend upon usury, but not unto thy 
brother ?" why said they not rather, " A stranger thou mayest hurt by usury, but not 
thy brother ?" is it not all the same in word and phrase here as before ? the Jews would 
have given them thanks for so translating it: who, by forcing the Hebrew word as they 
do, think it well done, to hurt any stranger, that is, any Christian, by usury, be it ever 
so great. 

Whether the first protestant translators of the Scriptures were guided by that spirit, 
which should be in Christian catholic translators, may be easily gathered from what fol- 
lows, as well as from what you have already seen. 

They were so profane and dissolute, that some of them termed that divine book, called, 
Canticitm Canticorum, containing the high mystery of Christ and his church, "The bat- 
lad of ballads of Solomon," as if it were a ballad of love, between Solomon and his con- 
cubine, as Castalio wantonly translated it. 

And yet more profanely, in another place, which even their last translation has not 
yet vouchsafed to correct, " We have conceived, we have born in pain, as though we 
should have brought forth wind."'^ I am ashamed to set down the literal commentary 
of this their translation. Was there any thing in the Hebrew to hinder them from trans- 
lating it in this manner. " We have conceived, and as it were travailed to bring forth,, 
and have brought forth the Spirit ?" Why should they say Wind rather than Spirit ? 
they are not ignorant, that the Septuagint in Greek, and the ancient fathers, do all ex- 
pound it,§ || ^ according to both the Hebrew and Greek, of the " Spirit of God," which 
is first conceived in us, and begins by fear, which the Scripture calls, "The beginning 
of wisdom :" insomuch, that in the Greek there are these godly words, famous in all an- 
tiquity, "Through the fear of thee, O Lord, we conceived, and have travailed with 
pain, and have brought forth the Spirit of thy salvation, which thou hast made upon the 
earth which excellently sets before our eyes the degrees of a faithful man's increase, 
and proceeding in the Spirit of God. But to say, " We have been with child," as their 
last translation has it,** "and have brought forth wind," can admit no spiritual inter- 
pretation ; but even as a mere Jew should translate, or understand it, who has no sense 
of the Spirit of God. It is the custom of protestants, in all such cases as this, where the 



* Zuinq-. in Luc. 7. To. 4. 

| Bib. 1562, 1577. 

| Isaiah, c. 16. ver. 18. 

§ St. Ambrose, lib, 2. de Interpret, c. 4, 



U Chrysostome, in psal. 7. prop, fin, 
*j[ See S. Hierom upon this place. 
** Bib, 1685. 



68 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 



more appropriate sense is of God's Holy Spirit, there to translate wind, as in psalm cxlvii,. 
ver. 18. 

Another impropriety similar to this is, that they will not translate for the angel's hon- 
our that carried Habakuc, " He sent him into Babylon, over the lake, by the force of 
his Spirit ;" but thus, " Through a mighty Wind." "So attributing it to the wind, not to 
the angel's power, and omitting quite the Greek word, aurS, " His/' which showeth 
plainly, that it was the angel's spirit, force, and power.* 

Again, where the prophet Isaiah speaks most manifestly of Christ, saying, " And (our 
Lord) shall not cause thy doctor to ny from thee any more, and thine eyes shall see thy 
master ;" which is all the same in effect with that which Christ says, " I will be with you 
unto the end of the world ;" there one of their Bibles translates thus, " Thy rain shall 
be no more kept back, but thine eyes shall see thy rain." Their last translation has cor- 
rected this mad falsi fication.-j- 

Again, where the holy church reads, " Rejoice, ye children of Sion, in the Lord your 
God, because he has given you the doctrine of justice there one of their translations 
has it, " The rain of righteousness :" and their last Bible, instead of correcting the for- 
mer, makes it yet worse, if it can be made worse, saying, "Be glad then, ye children of 
Sion, &c. for he hath given you the former rain moderately." Does the Hebrew word 
force them to this ? Doubtless they cannot but know, that it signifies a teacher or mas- 
ter; and therefore, even the Jews themselves, partly understand it of Esdras, partly of 
Christ's divinity: yet these new and partial translators are resolved to be more profane 
than the very Jews. If they had, as I hinted above, been guided by a catholic and 
Christian Spirit, they might have been satisfied with the sense of St. Hierom, a Christian 
doctor, upon these places, who makes no doubt but the Hebrew is doctor, master, 
teacher ; who also in the psalm translates thus, " With blessings shall the doctor be ar- 
rayed,"§ meaning Christ ; where protestanls, with the Jews of latter days, the enemies of 
Christ, translate, " The rain covers the pools." What cold stuff is this in respect of 
that other translation, so clearly pointing to Christ, our doctor, master, and lawgiver.! 

And again, where St. Jerom, and all the fathers translate and expound, " There shall 
be faith in thy times," to express the wonderful faith that shall be among Christians ; 
there they translate, " There shall be stability of trfy times." And their last Bible has 
it thus, " And wisdom and knowledge shall be the stability of thy times." Whereas the 
prophet reckons all these virtues singly, viz. judgment, justice, which they term righte- 
ousness, faith, wisdom, knowledge, and the fear of our Lord ; but the}', for a little ambi- 
guity of the Hebrew word, turn faith into stability. 

In Isa. 37. ver. 22. all their first Bibles read, — " O virgin daughter of Sion, he hath 
despised thee, and laughed thee to scorn : O daughter of Jerusalem, he hath shaken his 
head at thee." In the Hebrew, Greek, St. Hierom's translation and commentary, as 
also in the last protestant Bible, printed 1683, it is quite contrary, viz. " The virgin 
daughter of Sion has despised thee, O Assur: the daughter of Jerusalem has shaken her 
head at thee." All are of the feminine gender, and spoken of Sion literally triumphing 
over Assur; and of the church spiritually triumphing over heresies, and all her enemies. 
In their first Bibles they translated all as of the masculine gender, thereby applying it 
to Assur ; insulting against Sion and Jerusalem. But for what cause or reason they thus 
falsify it, will be hard to determine, unless they dreaded, that by translating it otherwise 
it might be applied spiritually to the church's triumphing over themselves, as her ene- 
mies. We cannot judge it an oversight in them, because we find it so translated in the 
fourth book of Kings, cap. 19. ver. 21. yea, and in all their first translations. 

A great many other faults are found in their first translations, which might be passed 
by, as not done upon any ill design, but perhaps rather as mistakes or over-sights,^ yet 
however, touching some few of them, it will not be amiss to demand a reason, why they 
were committed: as for example, why they translated, — "Ye abject of the Gentiles," 
Isa. 45. ver. 20. rather than, " Ye, who are saved of the Gentiles ;" or, as their transla- 
tion has it, " Ye that are escaped of the nations ?" or, 

Why, in their Bible of 1579, did they write at length, " Two thousand to them that 
keep the fruit thereof," rather than "two hundred ;" as it is in the Hebrew and Greek, 
and as now their last Bible has it ? or, 

Why read they in some of their Bibles, " As the fruits of cedar," and not rather ac- 
cording to the Greek and Hebrew, " Tabernacles of cedar ;" or however, as their last 
translation has it, u Tents of Kedar ?" or, 



* Isa. 30. v. 20. !| Isaiah, 33. ver. 6. 

f Joel 2. v. 23. *S Cantica. Canticor. c. 8. ver. 12. Cantica, 

i Lyra in 30. Canticor. c. 1 ver, 4. Isa, 7. v. 11. 
§ Psalm 84. ver. 7, 



OF THE SCRIPTURE. 



8^ 



Why do they translate, " Ask a sign, either in the depth, or in the height above," 
rather than, " Ask a sign, either in the depth of Hell," &c. as the Hebrew, Greek, and 
Latin has it ?* Or, 

Why do they translate, " To make ready an horse," rather than "beasts," as the 
Greek has it ; and as also now their edition of 1683 reads it ^ Or, 

Why translate they, " If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, without 
breaking the law of Moses," rather than, according to the Greek, which their last trans- 
lation has followed, " If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, to the end the 
law of Moses should not be broken," ?4 Or, 

Why read they, " The Son of man must suffer many things, and be reproved of the 
elders," for " be rejected of the elders," as the Greek, and now their Bibles of 1683 
have it; and as in the Psalm, " The stone which the builders rejected we say not re- 
proving of the said stone, which is Christ ?§ 

Again, why translate they thus, " Many which had seen the first house, when the 
foundation of this house was laid before their eyes, wept," &c. when in the Hebrew, 
Greek, and Latin, it is read thus : " Many who had seen the first house in the foundation 
thereof, (i. e. yet standing upon the foundation, undestroyed,) and this temple before 
their eyes, wept ?" I supposed they imagined, that it should be meant they saw Solo- 
mon's temple when it was first founded ; which, because it was impossible, they trans- 
lated otherwise than it is in the Hebrew and Greek : they should indeed have considered 
better of it. 

Though we do not look upon several of these as done, I say, with any ill design, yet 
we cannot excuse them for being done with much more licentious boldness, than ought 
to appear in sincere and honest translators. 



ABSURDITIES IN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE. 



Their unrestrained licentiousness is yet further manifest, in their turning of David's 
Psalms into rhyme, without reason, and then singing them in their congregations ; tell- 
ing the people, from Saint James, cap. 5. " If any be merry, let him sing psalms ;" be- 
ing resolved to do nothing but what they produce a text of Scripture for, though of their 
own making : for, though the apostle exhorts " such as are heavy, to pray," and " such 
as are merry, to sing ;" yet he does not in particular appoint David's Psalms to be sung 
by the merry, no more than he appoints our Lord's Prayer to be said by such as he ex- 
horts to pray, though perhaps he meant it of both : so that from any thing our bold in- 
terpreters can gather from the text, JEqiw animo est ? Psallat. ^o.kmtu, St. James might 
mean other spiritual songs and hymns, as well as David's Psalms : but be it that he ex- 
horted them to sing David's Psalms, which we have no cause to deny, because the church 
of Christ has ever used the same ; yet that he meant it of such nonsensical rhymes as 
T. Sternhold, Joseph Hopkins, Robert Wisdom, and other protestant poets have made 
to be sung in their churches, under the name of David's Psalms, none can ever grant 
who has read them. It has hitherto been the practice of God's church to sing David's 
Psalms, as truly translated from the Hebrew into Latin ; but never to sing such songs as 
Hopkins and Sternhold have turned from the English prose into metre : neither do I 
think that sober and judicious protestants themselves can look upon them as good 
forms of praises to be sung in their churches, to the glory, honour, and service of so 
great, so good, and so wise a God, when they shall consider how fully they are fraught 
with nonsense and ridiculous absurdities, besides many gross corruptions, viz. above two 
hundred ;|| confessed by protestants themselves to be found in the psalms in prose, from 
which these were turned into metre, which we may guess are^carcely corrected by the 
rhyme : to collect all the faults committed by the said blessed poets in their psalm-metre, 
would be a task too tedious for my designed brevity ; I will therefore only set down 
some few of their absurd and ridiculous expressions ; and for the rest, leave the reader 
to compare these psalms in metre with the others in prose, even as by themselves trans- 
lated. 



* Isai. 7. v. 11. 

f Acts 23. v. 24, 

* Jo. 7, v. 23. 



1? 



§ Mark 8. 31. 
« See the Preface 



90 



PROTESTANT ABSURDITIES 



PSALMS IN PROSE, BIBLE 1683. 



Psalm ii. Verse 3. 

Let us break their bands asunder, 
and cast away their cords from us. 



Psalm xvi. Verse 9, 10. 

Therefore my heart is glad, and my 
glory rejoiceth : my flesh also shall 
rest in hope. For thou wilt not leave 
my soul in Hell, &c. 



Psalm xviii. Verse 36. 

Thou hast enlarged my steps under 
me, that my feet did not slip. 



Psalm xviii. Verse 27. 

I have pursued mine enemies, and 
overtaken them : neither did I turn 
again till they were consumed. 



Psalm xxii. Verse 7. 

All they that see me, laugh me to 
scorn. They shoot out the lip, they 
shake the head. 

Psalm xxii. Verse 12. 

Many bulls have compassed me, 
strong bulls of Basan have beset me 
round. 



Psalm xxvi. Verse 10. 

In whose hand is mischief, and their 
right hand is full of bribes. 



PSALMS IN METRE, BIBLE 1683. 



Psahn ii. Verse 3. 

Shall we be bound to them ? say they ; 
Let all their bonds be broke, 
" And of their doctrine and their law, 
Let us reject the yoke/'* 

Psalm xvi. Verses 9, 10. 

Wherefore my heart and " tongue" also,f 

Do both rejoice together ; 
My " flesh and body" rest in hope, 

When I this thing consider. 
Thou wilt not leave my soul in " grave," 

For Lord thou lovest me, &c. 

Psalm xviii. Verse 36. 

And under me thou makest plain 

The way where I should walk : 
So that my feet shall never slip, 

" Nor stumble at a balk." 

Psalm xviii. Verse 37. 

So I suppress and wound my foes, 

That they can rise no more : 
For at my feet they fall down flat, 

I strike them all so sore 4 

Psalm xxii. Verse 7- 

All men despise, as they behold 

Me walking on the way : 
" They grin, they mow, they nod their heads," &c. 

Psalm xxii. Verse 12. 

• 

So many bulls do compass me, 

That be full strong of head : 
" Yea, bulls so fat, as tho' they had 

In Basan-field been fed." 

Psalm xxvi. Verse 10. 

Whose hands are heap'd with " craft§ and guile," 

Their lives thereof are full. 
And their right hand " with wrench and wile, 

For bribes doth pluck and pull." 



* The reader need not be told why this is added, besides its making up the rhyme. 

f What they translate " glory" in prose, they call " tongue" in rhyme. And for want 
of one foot to make up another verse, they thrust in a whole body, " flesh and body." 
Again, what in prose is called Hell, in rhyme they term Grave : as if souls were left in 
the Grave. 

* This warrior lays about him at a different rate from David. 
§ We have heard of crafty heads, but never of crafty hands. 



IN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE. 



91 



PSALMS fN PROSE, BIBLE 1683, 



Psalm xlix. Verse 20. 

Man that is in honour, and under- 
standeth not, is like the beasts that 
perish. 



Psalm lxxiv. Verses 11, 12. 

Why withdraweth thou thy hand, 
even thy right hand ? Pluck it out of 
thy bosom. 



Psalm lxxvii. Verse 16. 

He caused waters to run down 

like rivers. 

Psalm lxxviii. Verse 57. 

They were turned aside like a 

deceitful bow. 



Psalm lxxxix. Verse 46. 

The days of his youth hast thou 
shortened : thou hast covered him 
with shame. Selah. 



Psalm xcvii. Verse 12. 

Light is sown for the righteous, and 
gladness to the upright in heart. 



Psalm xcix. Verse 1. 

The Lord reigneth, let the people 
tremble ; he sitteth between the che- 
rubims, let the earth be moved. 



Psalm cxix. Verse 70. 

Their heart is as fat as grease : (as 
fat as brawn, in another Bible. But 
in the Latin Vulgate, Coagulatum est 
sicut lac cor eorum.') 



PSALMS IN METRE, BIBLE 1683. 



Psalm xlix. Verse 20. 

Thus man to honour God hath brought, 

Yet doth he not consider ; 
But like brute beast, so doth he live, 

" And turn to dust and powder." 

Psalm lxxiv. Verses 11, 12. 

Why dost thou draw thy hand " aback, 

And hide it in thy lap I" 
O pluck it out, and be not slack, 

" To give thy foes a wrap."* 

Psalm lxxvii. Verse 16. 

■ Of such abundance, that " no floods 

To them might be compared." 

Psalm lxxviii. Verse 57. 

They went astray, 

Much like a bow that would not bend, 
But slip and start away. 

Psalm lxxxix. Verse 46. 

Thou hast cut off, and made full short 

His youth and lusty days ; 
" And rais'd of him an ill report, 

With shame and great dispraise."f 

Psalm xcvii. Verse 12. 

And light doth spring up to the just, 

With pleasure for his part, 
Great joy with gladness, mirth and last,+ &c. 

Psalm xcix. Verse 1. 

The Lord doth reign, " altho' at it 

The people rage full sore :" 
Yea, he on cherub ims doth sit, 

" Tho' all the world do roar." 

Psalm cxix. Verse 70. 

Their hearts are swoln with worldly wealth, 
As " grease so are they fat." 



* In the title page they say, " If any be merry, let him sing psalms." But. consider- 
ing what psalms they are they advise him to sing, they might have done as well to 
have said rather, " If any would be merry, let him sing psalms." 

f To say that God raises an ill report of men, has affinity to Beza's doctrine, which 
makes God the author of sin. Vid. Supr. 

± I thought, till now, that lust had been a sin. 



92 PROTESTANT ABSURDITIES 

PSALMS IN PROSE, BIBLE 1683. PSALMS IN METRE, BIBLE 



Psalm cxix. Verse 83. 

For I am become like a bottle in the 
smoak. 

Psalm cxix. Verse 110. 

The wicked have laid a snare for 
me. 

Psalm cxix. Verse 130. 

The entrance of thy word giveth 
light : it giveth understanding unto 
the simple. 



Psalm cxix. Verse 150. 

They draw nigh that follow after 
mischief : they are far from thy law. 



Psalm cxx. Verse 5. 

Wo is me, that I sojourn in Mesech, 
that I dwell in the tents of Kedar. 



Psalm cxxvii. Verse 2. 

It is in vain for you to rise up early, 
to sit up late, to eat the bread of sor- 
row. 



Psalm cxxix. Verse 6. 

Let them be as grass upon the 
house-tops, which withereth before it 
groweth up. 



Psalm cxix. Verse 83. 

As a " skin-bottle" in the smoak, 
So am I parch'd and dried. 

Psalm cxix. Verse 110, 

Altho' the wicked laid their nets, 
" To catch me at a bay." 

Psalm cxix. Verse 130. 

When men first " enter into" thy word, 

They find a light most clear ; 
And very ideots understand, 

" When they it read or hear."* 

Psalm cxix. Verse 150. 

My foes draw near, " and do procure 

My death maliciously :" 
Which from thy law are far gone back, 

" And strayed from it lewdly." 

Psalm cxx. Verse 5. 

Alas ! too long I slack, 
Within these tents " so black," 
Which Kedars are by " name ;" 

" By whom the flock elect, 

And all of Isaac's sect, 
Are put to open shame."f 

Psalm cxxvii. Verse 2. 

Though ye rise early in the morn, 
And. so at night go late to bed, 

" Feeding full hardy with brown bread," 
Yet were your labour " lost and worn»"t 

Psalm cxxix. Verse 6. 

And made as grass upon the house, 
Which withereth " ere it grow."§ 



I could weary the reader with such like examples : they seldom or never speak of 
God's covenant with Israel, but they call it God's trade. || As in Psalm lxxviii. 10. where 
they sing, 



* By singing thus, they would possess the people that even the most ignorant of them 
are capable to understand the Scripture when they read it, or have it read to them. 

f Why is all this added ? only for the sake of rhyming to the word " name," unless 
they would make Isaac a sect-maker, and his religion a sect like their own. 

i If brown bread is the bread of affliction, a great many feeds on it who are able to 
buy white. 

§ How grass can wither before it grows, is a paradox. 

II Perhaps this word " trade" should have been " tradition" with them ; but for fear 
of a popish term, which they so much detest, they would rather write nonsense than 
use it. 



IN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE. 



9- 



For why ? they did not keep with God, the covenant that was made ; 

Nor yet would walk or lead their lives, " according to his trade." — Ps. Ixxxvii. V. 10. 

For why ? their hearts were nothing bent to him, nor to his " trade." — Ps. ex. V. 37. 

For this is unto Israel a statute and a " trade." — Psalm lxxxi. Verse 4. 

And set all my commandments light, and will not keep my " trade." — Ps. lxxxix. V. 32. 

To them be made a law and " trade," &c. — Psalm cxlviii. Verse 6. 

Such stuff as this you will find in other places. The words " more" and " less" have 
also stood them in as good stead as " trade" to make rhyme with, viz. 

All men on earth, both " least" and " most" — Psalm xxxiii. Verse 8. 

All kings, both " more" and "less" — Psalm xlviii. Verse 11. 

The children of Israel, each one both " more" and " less." — Ps. xlviii. V. 14. 

See also Psalm cix. Ver. 10. — Psalm xi. Ver. 6 — Psalm xxvii. Ver. 8. &c. &c. 

Nor are they a little beholden to an " ever and for aye." " For ever and a day." " For 
evermore always," and the like. 

Besides their turning the psalms into metre, they also made rhyme of the Lord's 
Prayer, the Creed, and the Ten Commandments. In which one thing is remarkable, viz. 
that in the Creed, upon the article of Christ's descent into Hell, they make a very plain 
distinction between the Hell of the damned, and that of the fathers of the Old Testa- 
ment, Limbas patrum, thus : 

And so he died in the flesh, but quickened in the sprite,, 

His body then was buried, as is our use and right. 

His soul did after this descend into the lower parts, 

A dread unto the wicked spirits, but joy to faithful hearts. 

Whom do they mean by those " faithful hearts," to whom our blessed Saviour's de- 
scent into Hell, Limbus, was a joy, but those of whom the prophet Zachary spoke, when 
prophesying of our Saviour's releasing them, he said, " Thou also in the blood of thy 
Testament hast let forth thy prisoners out of the lake, wherein there is no water." 
And, whom St. Peter meant, when he said, that Christ in Spirit " coming, preached to 
the spirits also that were in prison : which had been incredulous sometimes, when they 
expected the patience of God in the days of Noe, when the ark was building."* 

The turning of this article into metre is, I suppose, the very cause why we have not 
the Creed printed in metre in their latter impressions, and consequently, none of 
the other prayers and rhymes, which their first Bibles had after the psalms ; because to 
put out this and no more, would have given too shrewd a cause of suspicion. 

Besides the turning of these into metre, they made also certain other prayers of their 
own in rhyme ; in one of which they rank the Pope, whom their modern divines count a 
great bishop, and chief patriarch of the Western church, and from whom they pretend 
to receive their episcopal and priestly character, in the same list with the Turk, as if 
both were infidels alike, and both alike enemies to Christ. Robert Wisdom thus sets 
out his psalm, which the ignorant people may be apt to take for one of David's ; assuring 
themselves that David himself prayed to be delivered from the Turk and the Pope, and 
consequently, that the Pope is a dangerous creature. 

R. W. 

Preserve us, Lord, by thy dear word, 
From Turk and Pope defend us, Lord, 
Which both would thrust out of his throne, 
Our Lord Jesus Christ, thy dear Son. 

But this, with such other like stuff, is also left out by protestants in their last impres- 
sions, as being indeed ashamed of the impiety, malice, and folly of these gross impostors, 
especially of this Robert Wisdom, who, notwithstanding his name, was doubdess the 
most ignorant of all those who ever undertook to turn psalm into metre. And so it is 
likely he was looked upon by Dr. Corbet, sometime bishop of Norwich, when he made 
the following address to his ghost. 



* Zac. 9. 11. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 



TO THE GHOST OF R. WISDOM. 

That once a body, now but air, 
Arch-botcher of a psalm or prayer, 

From Carfax* come, 
And patch us up a zealous lay, 

With an old ever and for aye, i 
Or all and some. 

Or such a spirit lend me, 

As may an hymn down send me, 

To purge my brain. 
Then, Robin, look behind thee, 
Lest Turk or Pope do find thee, 

And go to bed again. 

This may seem too light for a treatise of this nature ; but the ridiculous absurdity of 
these rhymes, the singing of which in the churches, has, by several learned protestants, 
been complained of and lamented, cannot be fully enough exposed; that so, if possible, 
the common people's eyes may be opened, and they may be taken off from the fondness 
they seem to have for them. 

Though the ignorance, rather than ill intention of these busy poets appear in their 
psalm metre ; yet what follows cannot be excused from being done with a very treache- 
rous design of the translators : for what can possibly be a more sly piece of craft to de- 
ceive the ignorant reader, than to use catholic terms in all such places, where they may 
render them odious, and when they must needs sound ill in the people's ears ? For 
example, II Maccabees 6. ver. 7. this term " procession," they very maliciously translate, 
saying, " When the feast of Bacchus was kept, they were constrained to go in proces- 
sion to Bacchus." Let the reader see in the Greek lexicon if there be any thing in this 
word, 7roft>vruJjttv ra Siovvcrco like the catholic church's processions, or whether it signify so 
much as " to go about," as other of their bibles translate it, with perhaps no less ill mean- 
ing than that of 1570, though they name not procession. f 

St. John, cap. 9. ver. 22 and 25. where, for " He should be put out of the synagogue," 
their first translations read, " He should be excommunicated," to make the Jews' doings 
against them that confessed Christ, sound like the catholic church's acting against here- 
tics, in excommunicating them ; as if the church's excommunication of such, from the 
society and participation of the faithful, were like to that exterior putting out of the 
synagogue. And by this they designed to disgrace the priests' power of excommunica- 
tion, whereas the Jews had no such spiritual excommunication ; but, as the word only 
signifies, did put them out of the synagogue ; and so they should have translated the 
Greek word, including the very name synagogue. But this translation was made when 
the excommunications of the catholic church were daily denounced against them, which 
they have corrected in their last bible, because themselves have begun to assume such 
a power of excommunicating their non-conforming brethren. 

In Acts 17. ver. 23. for, " Seeing your idols," or " Seeing the things which you Athe- 
nians did worship," they translate, " Seeing your devotions," as though devotion and 
superstition were all one. 

And ver. 24. for " Temples of Diana," they translate " Shrines of Diana," to make the 
shrines of saints' bodies, and other holy relics, seem odious ; whereas the Greek word 
signifies temples. And Beza says, " He cannot see how it can signify shrines." 

Thus they make use of catholic words and terms, where they can thereby possibly ren- 
der them odious ; but in other places, lest the ancient words and names should still be re- 
tained, they change them into their own unaccustomed and original sound. So in the 
Old Testament, out of an itch to show their skill in the Hebrew, the first translators 
thought fit to change most of the proper names from the usual reading, never consider- 
ing how far differently proper names of all sorts are both written and sounded in differ- 
ent languages ; but this is in a great part rectified by the last translators, according to 
the directions of king James the first, that in translating the proper names, they should 
retain the usual and accustomed manner of speaking. 

Their altering of these proper names in the Old Testament, through the pride of 
being esteemed such knowing masters in the Hebrew, was yet much more tolerable, 



* The place of his burial in Oxford. 



f Bib. 1562, 1577. 



OF THE SCRIPTURE, 



95 



than the changing 1 of many other words in the New, through a heretical intention of 
introducing an utter oblivion of them among the people. 

The words " church, bishop, priest, altar, eucharist, sacrifice, grace, sacrament, bap- 
tism, penance, angel, apostle, Christ, &c." at their first revolt, they suppressed, and 
changed into " congregation, superintendent, elder and minister, table, thanksgiving, 
gift, mystery, washing, repentance, messenger, ambassador, anointed ;" several other 
words and phrases they likewise altered, as is evident from what goes before. And for 
what cause was all this change and alteration of catholic terms and phrases, but that the 
sound. of the words should vanish with the substance of the things, which they have 
taken away ? With Bishops they banished the pastoral care and charge of the pope and 
catholic bishops, and set up a child and a woman for the heads of their congregation. 
With priest went away the office of priest, in offering the holy sacrifice of Christ's body 
and blood : with grace went away the sacrament of holy orders, and four or five of the 
other sacraments : with altar, eucharist, and sacrifice, they excluded the proper service 
of Almighty God, with Christ's sacred presence in the blessed sacrament : with the 
word penance, they banished confession, absolution, and satisfaction for sins : they alter- 
ed the word church, because they had cut themselves off from the catholic church. 
And what other design could we suppose them to have had in the leaving out apostles, 
and putting in ambassadors or legates in leaving out angels, and introducing messen- 
gers ; in putting down the word anointed, where Christ used to be read ; and in translat- 
ing Grave for Hell ; but in time to extinguish all faith and memory of " apostle, angel, 
Heaven, Hell, Christ, and Christianity;" and to bring them to atheism and infidelity, the 
very centre to which their reformation tends ?* 

This fantastical and impious vanity, in changing catholic and Christian terms and 
speeches into their profane and heathenish use and signification, was a thing so detest- 
ed, even by Beza himself, notwithstanding his often being guilty of the same, that he 
inveighs against it, and those who use it, in this manner, " The world is* now come to 
that pass," says he, " that not only they who write their own discourses, refuse the fa- 
miliar and accustomed words of Scripture, as obscure, unsavoury, and out of use, but 
also those that translate the Scripture out of Greek into Latin, challenge to themselves 
the like liberty : so as while every man will rather freely follow his own judgment than 
religiously behave himself as the Holy Ghost's interpreter, many things they do not con- 
vert, but pervert : for which licentiousness and boldness, except remedy be provided in 
time, either I am notably deceived, or within a few years, instead of Christians we shall 
become Ciceronians, i. e. pagans, and by little and little shall lose the possession of the 
things themselves."f By this you see, that though Beza was one of the greatest mas- 
ters in this wanton, novel, and licentious art of changing Christian for heathen terms 
and phrases, yet he foresaw that in the end, with the words, would be taken away the 
things signified, " sacraments, baptism, eucharist, priesthood, sacrifice, angels, apostles, 
and all apostolical doctrine :" and that so we should be brought again from Christianity 
to heathenism. 

From which, and from the Stillingfleetiak - error,+ that, by asserting, " The pagan 
God, Jupiter, to be the true God, blessed for evermore," throws open the door of Jupi- 
ter's temple, and points out the very path-way to paganism, 

GOOD LORD DELIVER US ! 



* Change of words induces change of faith. 

f Beza in Acts. c. 10. v. 46. edit. anno. 1556, but in the latter edit, of 1565, some of 
these words are altered either by himself or the printer. 

* Dr. Stillingflcet's Charge of Idolatry against the Church of Rome, pag. 7* and p. 40, 



FINIS, 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724) 779-2111 



